Oso planning to go pro
Enjoy.https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/gl.fcgi?id=darviyu01&t=p&year=0&post=1
Thanks?
He's pointing out that he's terrible in relief, in the World Series.
Well, the problem is those outongs weren't relief. They just looked like it because he couldn't get out of the 2nd inning. For contrasthttps://www.baseball-reference.com/players/gl.fcgi?id=arrieja01&t=p&year=0&post=1Not sure how Darvish is an upgrade.
You're putting a lot of stock into those two performances?The industry as a whole considers him an upgrade. The Cubs lack of interest in Arrieta has hurt his market. Who would know him better?
When he was tipping pitches.
If I my goal was winning a World Series, I would put some stock in those performances. In 100% of his appearances in the World Series, he was a BP pitcher. I can't lie, I do find the Cubs lack of interest in Arrieta a bit puzzling as he has been their best pitcher in well, maybe ever, certainly in the last 20 years and he doesn't get the respect of Carlos Zambrano from cub fans. The who know him better thing is ridiculous. For 100 different reasons, number 1 probably being Scott Boras.
Number 1 being PEDs. Number 2 being Scott Boras.
There has been a ton written on how difficult it is to try put a $ value on WAR. But pulling from a great fangraphs article - - it was about $10.5M per 1.0 WAR in 2017. If you figure Darvish hits some of his incentives and gets the deal to about $130Mish, thats 12-13 WAR over the life of the deal, or about 2.25 per year. Considering that Darvish was good for 3.5 WAR last year and 2.6 WAR in his recovery shortened 2016, it looks good for the Cubs to recover value from this deal, even if he's a less than 2.0 WAR player in the last two years of the deal. That combined with the Cubs open window, need for a top 3 starter and ability to eat a big contract if necessary probably makes this a fine deal. Again, the most likely factor to flip that (after injury) is if the luxury tax depresses free agent deals moving forward.
Putting a ton of stock into two outings where he was likely tipping pitches seems, well, dumb. The "know him better" argument is not close to being ridiculous.
Hmm well then, I wonder what the Dodgers and Rangers know about Darvish.
Well the Rangers wanted him back but didn't have the money to spend and according to Jon Heyman the Dodgers had a 6 year offer for him contingent of if they could move Kemp. So I guess they know he's a good pitcher. Anything else?
Dodgers offered 6 years at 100. Cubs had reportedly gone to 4 - 110 on Arrieta earlier this winter.
Dodgers couldn’t offer more. To offer more they would have had to move money to avoid the lux tax. Same situation as the Yankees. The Cubs got a bargain just because those teams weren’t there to drive up the price.
The Dodgers have been over the tax threshold 5 straight years. It is nothing more than a convenient excuse.And the reported 16.67 AAV would have put them over the top threshold anyways.
But that's the point - they did want him back. And they absolutely want to remain under the tax this year to reset the penalties. Most of those deals that put them over the tax weren't Friedman's doing.
But clearly they didn't want him back badly. 6/100 is a non offer for what he had on the table. Obviously they didn't want him back as bad as the Cubs. Darvish made it clear he wanted to be back with LA. They didn't make him a priority. They must know something.
This is all sorts of dumb.