nate82

Odorizzi doesn't even have enough value to get Santana alone or even Ortiz on his own.

Kershaw, Bumgarner, Scherzer, and Sale right now to me are the only "aces" in MLB.

xFIP is taking more than one stat and putting it together into one. Overall that is a better stat to look at when you are looking at a full year for the bullpen. The Royals bullpen in 2015 as a whole wasn't as dominant as some claim it was. The post season is a completely different animal and there is more randomization in the playoffs than there is in the regular season due to there being less games being played thus less opportunities for the randomness to normalize. The 2015 Royals were definitely not the best team in baseball in 2015 and yet still won the World Series. The best teams don't always win in the playoffs in baseball most of it is due to random outcomes. Bullpens can be very random at when they are good and when they are bad.

Incorrect FIP is just like ERA if you want to predict a future ERA for a pitcher yes use FIP over ERA. FIP actually does win games and reduces runs because FIP is heavily dependent on strike outs, walks, and home runs. xFIP takes out the home run portion of the equation and replaces it with a calculated how many home runs the pitcher should have given up from their fly balls. xFIP formula is below: xFIP = (13x(Fly Balls x LgHR/FB%) + 3x(BB+HBP) - 2xK / IP) + FIP Constant So as you can see there it actually is a measurement for winning games and reducing runs. xFIP and FIP show you the same thing as ERA does it just gives you more in terms of a calculated expectancy on what the pitcher can control. Strike outs and Walks have the highest correlation to winning for pitchers than any other stat so you are incorrect in stating FIP doesn't win games or reduce runs. FIP by definition is more accurate at determining winning games and reducing runs.

That is a waste of time and a waste of money IMHO. If you are just trading a couple hundred dollars here and there and you are not investing tens or hundreds of thousand of dollars you are wasting your time on all of the advanced valuation models. It really is as simple as taking a chart and then putting in a linear equation on that chart. If the value of the stock is below the linear line then buy if it is above the line then sell. It really is as simple as downloading the data from yahoo finance and then putting that information into Excel and making a graph with a linear line. Take Amazon for instance: This is a 3-month trend of Aamzon you would buy when you are below the trend line and sell when above it. For example in this graph you would have bought in mid December and you would see a small profit now. It is far more advantageous to use what you already own to invest than it is to pay for someone to invest for you. If you want someone to invest for you I suggest investing in ETF funds as you are going to get more value (your time and money) from them than you will if you use a tool that you are probably only going to use once or twice a month on average. Just my opinion on this.

The Royals really didn't have that dominant of a bullpen in '15. Yes I know people like to repeat this as fact but the Royals bullpen in '15 was 15th overall in xFIP while the Brewers had the best bullpen in '15. Brewers bullpen in '15 had an xFIP of 3.45 while the Royals had an xFIP of 3.85 the starters weren't much better for the Royals either with an xFIP of 4.48 and the Brewers had an xFIP of 4.32 the best starters xFIP in 2015 were the Cubs at 3.24. The Royals offense wasn't all that great either but they did have a wRC+ of 99 that year which I believe puts them at the 2nd lowest wRC+ to win a World Series the Cardinals have the lowest at wRC+ of 98 most World Series teams have a wRC+ of 100 or more. The Astro's last year had a wRC+ of 121 and the Dodgers had a wRC+ of 104. I think the Brewers need to wait on getting a starting pitcher. I don't think this is the year to get one maybe you can get Atlanta to part with Teheran or one of their younger pitchers for Santana but I don't think that is going to happen. The Braves and the Brewers actually match up pretty well in terms of a trade the Braves need a corner OF and they have a bunch of young pitching to spare. The Braves OF would look rather good with Inciarte in CF , Santana in LF and Acuna in RF. That would give the 2018 and 2019 Braves a big boost in offense. I am not sure if the Brewers could get either Allard or Soroka 1 for 1 for Santana but it is something I would at least kick the tires on to see if the Braves would do that or see who the Brewers would have to kick in to get that done. Allard and Soroka would be #5 in the rotation for 2018 but 2019-2023 you could have a rotation of Davies, Anderson, Allard/Soroka, Burnes, Woodruff. That isn't an all that bad rotation while you are missing that ace or true #1 guy you still have a very good overall rotation with a lot of upside in Allard/Soroka and Burnes. You could even toss in Hader in there if you wanted to. If the Brewers are competing for a playoff spot come the trading deadline then they should definitely look to get someone then but otherwise I hope the Brewers just don't add anyone this offseason unless it is for a younger player who is going to contribute to the team further down the road.

Suter is never going to be a guy that can go six or seven innings. Once Suter goes through the 2nd time through the lineup batters basically see his stuff as t-ball stuff and just start hitting him consistently. Suter is your classic #5 pitcher someone who can get you to around the fifth inning and will occasionally give you six of seven innings but those times are rare. Suter just doesn't have the stuff to make it past the third time through the lineup and thus is stuck in the #5 type pitcher. Suter probably has more value as a loogy than he does as a #5 starter going forward in his career.

For the last two months of the season the Brewers were averaging about 2-runs a game. It is remarkable that the rotation the Brewers had that they only lost by 1-game. When your offense is only scoring about 2-runs a game it doesn't matter who your starting pitchers are you are not going to win many games. The offense was the culprit not the starting pitchers down the stretch. Improving the pitching doesn't really move the needle all that much for the Brewers at least the starting pitching is not going to move as much as Cain and Yelich have. Unless you are adding Kershaw to the rotation the needle is not going to move all that much in terms of win expectancy. Adding Cain and Yelich moves the needle further even adding just Cain would move it more than adding someone like Archer. The cost of adding someone like Archer is going to outweigh the win benefits that you are trying to add. The better add is to add someone like Odorizzi or someone similar. Your win expectancy of acquiring someone like Odorizzi versus someone like Archer is not all that far off while the cost to add someone like Archer is far more than it is to add someone like Odorizzi. The future value of the prospects that you are giving up for Odorizzi is going to be far less than what you will have to give up to get Archer. Unless you can get Archer at a cheaper price than what the Rays are currently asking for it just isn't worth it right now to go after Archer. Odorizzi and players like him are just a better addition cost wise than a top of the rotation pitcher will be. I would prefer the Brewers just hold right now and wait until the deadline. There will probably be better pitchers available at the deadline than there are now. Stroman and others will be available come the deadline who will cost less than what the Rays are asking for now for Archer.

I hope the Brewers just stay away from all three but especially stay away from Lynn. Lynn is just another Lohse type and people have suspicions why the Cubs haven't offered Arrieta deal but don't have suspicions why Lynn hasn't even gotten a call from the Cardinals? The Cubs at least contacted Arrieta so he would have been their backup plan if they couldn't get Cobb or Darvish. The Cardinals are not even looking at Lynn as a possibility for their rotation. Hello red flags there!

Again you are incorrect. It wasn't because of the rotation that the Brewers missed the playoffs last year it was because of the offense. The offense fell off a cliff a few times last year and the Brewers as a whole only had a WRC+ of 93. No team in the modern era has had a WRC+ lower than 98 win a world series. Majority of playoff teams have had a WRC+ of about 100 and there usually very few teams that make it who are below that mark. The worst xFIP to win the World Series for starters belongs to the Royals at 4.48. A staff of nothing but #3 pitchers has about the same chance as a team with multiple #1's to win in the playoffs. The Nationals didn't make it to the World Series again last year they only made the playoffs and were beat by a team that didn't really have a #1 type pitcher. The Cubs pitching staff last year was a bunch of #2's and 3's that beat a staff that has an ace and an almost ace.

Brewers aren't going anywhere with a rotation full of 3's and 4's. Anderson has been good but it took him a while to get there. Davies can be inconsistent. If you want to compete you need proven starters. IF they can get to the playoffs, they will get shellacked. Not necessarily. If this were true the Nationals would have back to back to back championships but they don't they barely have a series win. The Nationals for the last couple of years have had the best rotation and a pretty good offense but yet they have not won a single world series.

IMO an "ace" is the same thing as saying someone is a #1 pitcher. By definition with 30 teams that means there are 30 #1 pitchers. No, if Jeff Suppan was a teams #1 pitcher coming into the season would you call him a #1 pitcher just because he is at the top of a teams rotation?

I don't want to give up a pick to sign Lynn and I don't want to give the Cardinals an extra pick by signing him either.

This is my wife. She checks our kids' 529s weekly, and they are 6 and 3 years old! I check my quarterly statements when they come in the mail and both of us are in the WRS so we only get one annual statement and we have very little to do with how that money is invested, which is really nice. I'm looking at getting some non-retirement investments going at some point and have zeroed in on VTI or VOO on the ETF front. For some reason I'm sort of chicken when it comes to taking the plunge, but I think it's more due to the amount that we are discussing putting into an account and it's really hard to part with large sums of money sometimes. I do know that it's a best long-term strategy and we will see gains if we let it sit for a while before withdrawing is as income (assuming it earns money over the next several years!). I am kind of guilty of the first one but I get bored at work sometimes and I just check it but never do anything. I usually just play around with the calculator they have. For your second one have you though of something like this https://www.nationwide.com/retirementincome.jsp instead? You have to put money in it monthly but it is basically an annuity which some people are not fans of. I don't like them but if you don't like risk then an annuity is probably better for you. If you want to go with a one time investment I would go with either of the ETF's you have posted. Others you may want to look at are SPY and SDY. Another option with Vanguard is an ETF of ETF's confusing right? Well not really it is basically a managed ETF without the high fees of a managed fund because Vanguard is basically selling you all of their ETF's in one package. For example the stock symbol VTC holds all of Vanguard's corporate bond ETF's. So you are basically buying all of the ETF's that Vanguard holds for corporate bonds in one ETF instead of investing in multiple or all of them.

Dekker is also horrible get that WI bias out of here! I will give you Sabonis though but he is a slow moving center not really someone who would fit all that well on this team.

I am fine with this trade. Vaughn has no future with the Bucks and I think his rookie contract expires after this year?

Same bat time same bat channel?

Not sure how cryptocurrency is a scam anymore than any other fiat currency would be.

Posted this elsewhere but Darvish has under 3ERA in 63% of his games in wins/no decisions. A 2.35 ERA and 6.12ERA in the losses only 37% of starts. Arrieta has a 1.6ERA in 46% of his starts of Wins only. 24.6% of his starts of no decisions is a 4.04 ERA. Losses at 7.17. Taking the majority of Arrieta's starts his no-decision/losses 54% of the time he's a 5.36 ERA pitcher. Yeah Darvish is a far better pitcher. You just can't take his no-decision/losses and discount the wins and say he is this 54% of the time. Your analysis is off base and you have no context to prove that either Arrieta or Darvish are the players you are claiming they are by taking their no decisions and their losses. Context matters here are you taking into account Arrieta's earlier years where he wasn't as good with the Orioles? How many years are you looking at here? If you are just looking at a couple of years this is basically useless information which even if you take the players whole career this is useless information.

They have an embarrassment of riches. Multiple top pitching prospects that are at the MLB level or MLB-ready. LHP Luiz Gohara would be my dream addition. Would a Santana and something like Pennington get that done? NO! Not even close to getting it done. Newcomb is probably someone you could get with that package maybe.

I am not sure if you can trade contracts once you have released a player. That might just be dead money for the Red Sox at this point and time.

I am definitely not paying for Lucroy

If Santana is going to an NL team the Braves and Mets make the most sense. I don't think the Braves are going to let go of Teheran but maybe they do. Degrom from the Mets makes some sense. I don't think the Mets would move Cespedes back to CF that is just not a good idea. With Conforto and Bruce also in the running for corner OF spots that doesn't leave much room for Santana unless the Mets see Santana as a 1B then that makes sense. Maybe the Padres make sense here but I doubt they would have interest. The only other team I can think of would be the Dodgers but you would have to do a 3-team deal for that to work and apparently no one wants Puig or Kemp. Maybe do a 3-team trade with the A's and the Dodgers. The A's get Puig and Edwin Rios, Dodgers get Santana, and the Brewers get Mitchell White and Ryu. I doubt that works but it was the only thing I could think of. The Dodgers would then clear enough payroll to sign Darvish I think with these two moves.

So I finished my taxes last week and somehow I got my State return in less than a week after filing. Not complaining but this feels weird.

I don't believe Santana is going any where. I believe it might be Thames or Shaw who will be going some where.