Barfield to the Indians...
 

...for "third baseman" Kouzmanoff and RHP Andrew Brown.

...

...

hahahah Kevin Towers is an idiot

Re: Barfield to the Indians...
 

[ QUOTE ]
...for "third baseman" Kouzmanoff and RHP Andrew Brown.

...

...

hahahah Kevin Towers is an idiot

[/ QUOTE ]

You really think this was a bad trade for SD?

Re: Barfield to the Indians...
 

I don't see how this could be laughable for either side, but then again I am a huge mark for Kouz.

Re: Barfield to the Indians...
 

Barfield looks like the epitome of average, but since he's young and very cheap that's pretty cool, I know, but Kouz's defense doesn't seem that terrible, below average, but acceptable and the [censored] can hit like crazy. Plus Clev. threw in a nice reliever and both players going to SD will make the league min. as well as Barfield so what's the BFD? SD seemed set on upgrading at 2B if the rumors are true anyway.

Re: Barfield to the Indians...
 

I hear that Marcus Giles might be on his way to SD.

Re: Barfield to the Indians...
 

[ QUOTE ]
I hear that Marcus Giles might be on his way to SD.

[/ QUOTE ]That's an upgrade?

Re: Barfield to the Indians...
 

Ingoring salaries...

They were similar players in 2006, with Giles posting a Win Shares of 16 vs. Barfield's 18. (By comparison, Pujols usually posts a WS of about 40)

But Barfields's younger. However, Giles posted a significantly better 25 WS in 2005, so SD could be praying for a bounce-back to those levels.

Barfield's age probably makes him a better player now, though, since he is more likely to see improvements in performance.

Re: Barfield to the Indians...
 

[ QUOTE ]
Ingoring salaries...

They were similar players in 2006, with Giles posting a Win Shares of 16 vs. Barfield's 18. (By comparison, Pujols usually posts a WS of about 40)

But Barfields's younger. However, Giles posted a significantly better 25 WS in 2005, so SD could be praying for a bounce-back to those levels.

Barfield's age probably makes him a better player now, though, since he is more likely to see improvements in performance.

[/ QUOTE ]

Win Shares measures contribution, not true talent. If a player has a high average w/ RISP, then Win Shares gives him credit for that, even if hitting for a high average with RISP is not likely to be a consistently repeatable skill. If a player hits home runs with runners on base, WS gives credit for that, even if there is no repeatable skill in hitting HRs with runners on base v. no runners on base.

Who is a better offensive 3rd baseman - Troy Glaus or Melvin Mora? WS says Mora in 2006, even though Glaus' .252/.355/.513 dwarfs Mora's .274/.342/.391? Why? Largely because Mora hit .306 w/ RISP, Glaus .252.

Using WS is analagous to using RBI- its value lies in its ability to tell us what someone did, but not so much in what someone will do.

Re: Barfield to the Indians...
 

Yeah, but it's a good way to quickly look at a player's overall contributions (including defense). Like all baseball stats, it doesn't stand alone.

And in this context, it let's us see why SD may go after Giles (i.e. irrationally praying for a return to 2005's contribution level).

I didn't mean to say "oh, his win shares were higher, he's better". I said "last year they achieved about the same" which is true.

Re: Barfield to the Indians...
 

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, but it's a good way to quickly look at a player's overall contributions (including defense). Like all baseball stats, it doesn't stand alone.

And in this context, it let's us see why SD may go after Giles (i.e. irrationally praying for a return to 2005's contribution level).

I didn't mean to say "oh, his win shares were higher, he's better". I said "last year they achieved about the same" which is true.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course the win share numbers you posted are accurate and Giles and Barfield had similar 2006 WS numbers.

WS is largely irrelvant to a meaningful analyasis of issue at hand, which is skill going forward, since WS's value is largely tied up in things that aren't consistently repeatable skills.

FWIW WS feilding stat's aren't very good. They are esentially the same as BP's rate, which means taking traditional fiedlding stats and then adjusting them based on the handeness and gb/fb ratio of a team's staff, plus a few other goodies. PBP defensive stats are far more accurate and meaningful. Article on this issue

Re: Barfield to the Indians...
 

Right now, I think this is a bad trade for SD. Barfield has already proven himself at the MLB level, his MiLB track record is pretty good, and he plays 2B.

Kouz has proven he can dominate AA as a 25 year old, and play a below average 3B defensively. Brown throws really hard, but can't hit the broadside of a barn.

If Kouz can improve defensively and hit .280 with plus power, and [if]if[/i] Brown can harness his command, this trade might work out to be even.

Re: Barfield to the Indians...
 

I know what you're saying and I don't disagree with you. However, if we're going to talk about two players and guess who will be better next year, then the first place to look is last year's stats.

Without digging really deep into the numbers, I would look at WS as a single number that will give some indication of how well they played overall last year. As a first order approximation, that's an imperfect but okay guess of what they might do next year.

Now, if I really wanted to spend an hour cooking up a prediction for next year's stats, then I would try to remove non-sustainable impacts like BA in play and BA with RISP, and probably focus in on their "core" hitting stats like HR, SO, BB per PA, probably make some attempt to trend these forward based on current ages. But just looking at WS was enough, IMO, to say "these players were of roughly equivalent value last year, so it isn't clear that switching Giles for Barfield is an upgrade or not".

I understand your point, but I am not claiming that last year's WS is the ultimate stat and that it completely describes how good these guys will be next year.

Besides, Giles had a better BA with RISP so he's more clutch and therefore a better team player, too. He is also a scrappier player with more hustle.

Just kidding.

Re: Barfield to the Indians...
 

- Brown had no options left
- Barfield's very solid numbers came in San Diego. Park factor is nuts.
- SD could hold hope that reuniting Giles with his big bro will put his drinking in its place.

Re: Barfield to the Indians...
 

In all likelihood Kouz will be a better player for the next year or two than Barfield, who I don't see as much of an upgrade over the in-house options for Cleveland at 2b, although he does have more upside because he is younger.

I think this trade is about even.

Re: Barfield to the Indians...
 

Cleveland mgt and press are playing up the park factor bigtime in their justifications for the deal. Saying the short right field and humidity are going to up his HR totals.

KJS

Re: Barfield to the Indians...
 

[ QUOTE ]
Cleveland mgt and press are playing up the park factor bigtime in their justifications for the deal. Saying the short right field and humidity are going to up his HR totals.

KJS

[/ QUOTE ]

In 2006 Barfield hit 6 HR in 280 PA* at home and 7 HR in 289 PA* on the road.

So obviously he will hit 30 now that he's away from SD! Or not.

*Excludes HBP, so not really PA but close enough.

Re: Barfield to the Indians...
 

FWIW Barfield's road numbers are MUCH better than his home numbers.

Re: Barfield to the Indians...
 

[ QUOTE ]
FWIW Barfield's road numbers are MUCH better than his home numbers.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, I know. I am making reference specifically to the claim that he will hit more HR now that he doesn't play in SD, even though his HR rate was the same there as it was away.

Also, if SD's park was really "stealing" a bunch of his HR you would expect that he would have a lot of doubles at home, but he didn't.

Furthermore, his hitting on the road was "better" primarily due to the fact that his BA on balls in play was much higher, and that is almost exclusively due to luck.

Re: Barfield to the Indians...
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
FWIW Barfield's road numbers are MUCH better than his home numbers.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, I know. I am making reference specifically to the claim that he will hit more HR now that he doesn't play in SD, even though his HR rate was the same there as it was away.

Also, if SD's park was really "stealing" a bunch of his HR you would expect that he would have a lot of doubles at home, but he didn't.

Furthermore, his hitting on the road was "better" primarily due to the fact that his BA on balls in play was much higher, and that is almost exclusively due to luck.

[/ QUOTE ]

stadiums affect BABIP

Re: Barfield to the Indians...
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
FWIW Barfield's road numbers are MUCH better than his home numbers.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, I know. I am making reference specifically to the claim that he will hit more HR now that he doesn't play in SD, even though his HR rate was the same there as it was away.

Also, if SD's park was really "stealing" a bunch of his HR you would expect that he would have a lot of doubles at home, but he didn't.

Furthermore, his hitting on the road was "better" primarily due to the fact that his BA on balls in play was much higher, and that is almost exclusively due to luck.

[/ QUOTE ]

stadiums affect BABIP

[/ QUOTE ]

What he said, and I can almost guarantee you Barfield hits more homers this year than he did last year assuming he gets 600 PA's.

Re: Barfield to the Indians...
 

Can anyone link me to a good sabermetric article that covers the trade? Barfield was a solid, young 2B for us, but I don't know anything about Kouzmanoff or Brown so I can't evaluate the trade.

Re: Barfield to the Indians...
 

Not saying I believe them, just throwing it out there.

KJS

Re: Barfield to the Indians...
 

[ QUOTE ]
stadiums affect BABIP

[/ QUOTE ]

Not to the tune of .320 vs. 260, which was Barfield's split last year.

Re: Barfield to the Indians...
 

[ QUOTE ]
I can almost guarantee you Barfield hits more homers this year than he did last year assuming he gets 600 PA's.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure, I would agree with that. But it will have more to do with the fact that hitters in general just get better and stronger when they go from age 23 to age 24. But assuming that the generally negative effects of SD's park are reflected in Barfield's 2006 splits without checking the numbers is just stupid.

Re: Barfield to the Indians...
 

[ QUOTE ]
FWIW Barfield's road numbers are MUCH better than his home numbers.

[/ QUOTE ] On the other hand, his vs. righty/lefty split is just as large:

vs. rhp .266 .299 .376
vs. lhp .331 .378 .587

In other words, he should have been the lesser half of a platoon last year.

Re: Barfield to the Indians...
 

Platoon splits for righties will regress to about the same for all righties.