Add new comment

Doc,
If you had said Sim-league, my response would've been very different. I've played Sim - Roto - and FP.
As for Sim-league -- I twice took Tampa to the playoffs in 4 seasons, (2 completely different leagues). And I would definitely agree that playing Sim leagues added to my analytical base in regards to real-world baseball.
As for ROTO - I stand by my claim. ROTO isn't just about the categories. (I played in a 7X7 roto league, which included advanced stats like OPS, DIPs, and even included what defensive stats we could get at the time - errors and OF assists). But, ROTO "requires" a balanced attack. You *CANNOT* win a ROTO league by hitting 300 HRs when the next best club gets 200. The last 98 extra HRs don't gain you anything in that category. The game SYSTEM of ROTO, (regardless of categories), makes the roster construction process so different that I will stand by my statement - that using ROTO roster construction logic to justify real-world roster construction logic is 10 kinds of stupid.
===========
Funny you should feel so strongly about hitters over pitchers for prospect-projection. It just so happens that in my very first sim-league, the first breakout BATTER I ever managed to get lucky with - (it was a strange one - I'm thinking Juan Pierre took some kind of quantum leap forward during his age 26 season) - happened to have a "career ending" injury the next season, immediately after I traded away the only player in my system with a shot at replacing him). But, I digress.
On the general subject of lowering risk - I can accept the basic concept that the everyday prospect is less risky than the pitching prospect, (especially prior to reaching the majors).
In this "particular" context - I do not agree with the assessment. First off, corner OF is the "thickest" position in baseball. It's the easiest to find replacements. Part of the risk assessment is also "how hard will it be to replace what I'm trading?" In this case, you've got two prospects. Both are young. Both have two full major league seasons.
The OF has two 100-ish OPS+ seasons - and little evidence of forward development, (his patience improved slightly).
The pitcher got more aggressive, (more Ks, fewer walks, more HRs), but the aggregate was a definite step forward.
The biggest unknown is move from reliever to starter for Morrow. That clouds the issue.
======
But, the bigger issue I see that makes the argument dubious - is that pitcher performance variation INCLUDES defensive performance. While things like DIPs ERAs are smoothing out some of this noise, I think the "perception" of pitcher volatility is still largely tied to Wins and ERA - same as always.
But, every day player projections typically do not include defensive projections, (because we've seen these to be incredibly volatile, calling their validity into question). Basically, the single largest factor in pitcher volatility that MAKES them volatile is blithely ignored when examining the every day player.
Project Young to go -5, -18, +3, -8 defensively for the next 4 seasons, and what happens to his aggregate worth?
(No - I don't trust the defensive metrics - and am not arguing for their inclusion). But, I am saying that it is the analyses SYSTEMS that are creating a large chunk of the volatility in pitchers.
Honestly, I think a large chunk of the reality here is that the short-coming of the MATH are creating the conclusion - not the players themselves.
In all honesty, I don't care what his age is - a guy posting a couple of 100ish years as a corner OF doesn't thrill me. Maybe he becomes Carlos Lee. Maybe he becomes the next Hamelin or Cordova. I dunno. But I do know it's a LOT easier to find a Gabe Gross riding the pine than it is to find solid #3 starters at a reasonable price.