Matt Davidson Traded for Addison Reed

DWKB

ASFN Icon
Joined
May 15, 2002
Posts
18,224
Reaction score
7,491
Location
Annapolis, MD
Seems to me Reed has the superior stats... Unless I'm missing something...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

IMO, yeah, a lot.

Most of those numbers are like looking at the horizon and assume the world is flat. They don't tell you much, if anything, regarding a RP (Plus you didn't even use the same numbers to make your declaration, seems an attempt at bias too). I personally hate the "decide I love the trade, work backwards to prove it was good" abuse of stats.

RP live and die in situations. A total ERA isn't going to distinguish that except at the extremes. The use of Saves, ignoring the level of variability in a Save condition, the case of inherited runners for a RP, and the effect an offense can have on those stats quoted seems completely ignored.

Bell had 9 appearances where the opposing team scored 1 run, 6 appearances where they scored two runs, a 3 appearances where the scored 3 runs. This leaves him with 51 appearances where the team did not score while he pitched.

Reed had 12 appearances where the team scored 1 run, 5 appearances where they scored 2 runs, 1 where they scored 4, and 1 where they scored 5. This leaves him with 49 appearances where the team did not score while he pitched.

I'd say Bell pitched better last year, if just slightly.

Looking at the more complex conditional stats like WinProbabilityAdded and LeverageIndex you see Reed actually hurt his team more than he helped them ( a negative total WPA) and performed worse in highly leveraged situations than others. Meanwhile, Bell's pitching contributed overall to helping the team more than hurting them(a positive total WPA) and he performed much better in highly leveraged situations than others.

Even using the stats you chose, Bell had a higher K/9 and a lower BB/9 than Reed. Bell also had a much higher percentage of inherited runners LOB than Reed last year keeping his teammates ERA lower.

Now, I'd say that the saving grace for Reed is that he's young and has a better opportunity to improve from his last year stats, but the fact that his FB dropped 2 MPH (a large drop) from the year before makes me wonder about that chance.

Again, Davidson might not have had a place on this team, but that doesn't mean he doesn't have value. Basically replacing Bell with Reed at the same performance, we've saved around $4M and gave up Davidson and Holmberg.

I don't see what is so great about those deals that makes people excited aside from "Hey! 40 saves!" and that seems myopic.
 
Last edited:

82CardsGrad

7 x 70
Joined
Dec 31, 2004
Posts
36,146
Reaction score
8,070
Location
Scottsdale
IMO, yeah, a lot.

Most of those numbers are like looking at the horizon and assume the world is flat. They don't tell you much, if anything, regarding a RP (Plus you didn't even use the same numbers to make your declaration, seems an attempt at bias too). I personally hate the "decide I love the trade, work backwards to prove it was good" abuse of stats.

Huh?? I only posted Reed's stats?? :confused:

RP live and die in situations. A total ERA isn't going to distinguish that except at the extremes. The use of Saves, ignoring the level of variability in a Save condition, the case of inherited runners for a RP, and the effect an offense can have on those stats quoted seems completely ignored.

Bell had 9 appearances where the opposing team scored 1 run, 6 appearances where they scored two runs, a 3 appearances where the scored 3 runs. This leaves him with 51 appearances where the team did not score while he pitched.

Reed had 12 appearances where the team scored 1 run, 5 appearances where they scored 2 runs, 1 where they scored 4, and 1 where they scored 5. This leaves him with 49 appearances where the team did not score while he pitched.

I'd say Bell pitched better last year, if just slightly.

Looking at the more complex conditional stats like WinProbabilityAdded and LeverageIndex you see Reed actually hurt his team more than he helped them ( a negative total WPA) and performed worse in highly leveraged situations than others. Meanwhile, Bell's pitching contributed overall to helping the team more than hurting them(a positive total WPA) and he performed much better in highly leveraged situations than others.

Even using the stats you chose, Bell had a higher K/9 and a lower BB/9 than Reed. Bell also had a much higher percentage of inherited runners LOB than Reed last year keeping his teammates ERA lower.

Now, I'd say that the saving grace for Reed is that he's young and has a better opportunity to improve from his last year stats, but the fact that his FB dropped 2 MPH (a large drop) from the year before makes me wonder about that chance.

Again, Davidson might not have had a place on this team, but that doesn't mean he doesn't have value. Basically replacing Bell with Reed at the same performance, we've saved around $4M and gave up Davidson and Holmberg.

I don't see what is so great about those deals that makes people excited aside from "Hey! 40 saves!" and that seems myopic.

Yea, yea, yea... that's all interesting stuff and all. And I stll can't help but LOL whenever Holmberg gets tossed into the discussion... Too funny....
Bottom line is that even if you make the effort to turn this into a Bell vs Reed discussion, the trade is a GOOD one. But of course, this was a trade where we unloaded a platoon player and received a guy who put up 40 saves last year, and is under our control thru the 2017 season.
Nice! ;)
 

DWKB

ASFN Icon
Joined
May 15, 2002
Posts
18,224
Reaction score
7,491
Location
Annapolis, MD
Huh?? I only posted Reed's stats?? :confused:



Yea, yea, yea... that's all interesting stuff and all. And I stll can't help but LOL whenever Holmberg gets tossed into the discussion... Too funny....
Bottom line is that even if you make the effort to turn this into a Bell vs Reed discussion, the trade is a GOOD one. But of course, this was a trade where we unloaded a platoon player and received a guy who put up 40 saves last year, and is under our control thru the 2017 season.
Nice! ;)

You responded that Reed had superior stats without even comparing the two completely. A fan on a message board can get away with that type of lazy and superficial analysis, but I'd expect the GM of a MLB team to look further. Fans are just fans for a reason after all and message boards are hardly the place to look for real analysis regarding transactions and performance. I get this.

I looked further and found Reed wanting, especially compared to Bell, whom he is directly replacing (somehow this concept is a reach for you that I must make an effort). I wish you could offer up more of a response than "Yeah, yeah, yeah" because it might lead to a better discussion. The numbers bear out that Bell = Reed. Put Reed in Bell's situations in AZ and you won't see 40 Saves IMO.

Given the attitudes most have regarding our prospects, you'd think they'd be calling for the heads of our people who evaluate draft talent or those who are responsible for developing that talent.
 
Last edited:

crisper57

Open the Roof!
Joined
Jan 23, 2007
Posts
14,950
Reaction score
1,019
Location
Phoenix, AZ
I like the trade. We gave up an expendable prospect for a guy who has had some success in his role at the Major League level. If we get Tanaka, we win the offseason. If we don't, I think we won't be too happy with the starting rotation this season. In fact, we may not be in too many games to utilize a closer with our current rotation.
 

82CardsGrad

7 x 70
Joined
Dec 31, 2004
Posts
36,146
Reaction score
8,070
Location
Scottsdale
You responded that Reed had superior stats without even comparing the two completely. A fan on a message board can get away with that type of lazy and superficial analysis, but I'd expect the GM of a MLB team to look further. Fans are just fans for a reason after all and message boards are hardly the place to look for real analysis regarding transactions and performance. I get this.

I looked further and found Reed wanting, especially compared to Bell, whom he is directly replacing (somehow this concept is a reach for you that I must make an effort). I wish you could offer up more of a response than "Yeah, yeah, yeah" because it might lead to a better discussion. If all you have is "40 Saves!" then we can't really go much further, can we?

Given the attitudes most have regarding our prospects, you'd think they'd be calling for the heads of our people who evaluate draft talent or those who are responsible for developing that talent.

I compared the stats I provided to the stats provided by another poster. Works for me. ;)
That said, this might totally knock you off your chair - but, I am not one to spend too much time digging into layer upon layer of stats... At the end of the day, Reed put up 40 saves, while substantially lowering his WHIP from the previous season. Yes, he took 2 MPH off his fast ball, while increasing his K/9 inning ratio and decreasing his BB/9 inning ratio. Also, Bell had a 1.6 HR/9 inning ratio versus Reed's .8! I like those stats too.
Baseball is great in this way... you can almost always dig deep enough and find stats that could make your case.
So, if you want to keep this a Bell vs Reed trade, I'm totally cool with that. And in that context, I REALLY, REALLY like this trade... A Lot! :D
 
Last edited:

WildBB

Yogi n da Bear
Joined
Mar 20, 2004
Posts
14,295
Reaction score
1,239
Location
The Sonoran Jungle - West
IF ARZ can get Tanaka then okay trade but if not ARZ just traded away another piece they would need to acquire the Ace Towers is looking for, Sale for example.

RP / Closers are probably the most saturated position on the FA market so this guy better carry his weight.

They aren't. Good ones anyway. The one's who aren't replacable aren't allowed to hit FA.
 

DWKB

ASFN Icon
Joined
May 15, 2002
Posts
18,224
Reaction score
7,491
Location
Annapolis, MD
Outside of the AZSF bubble the moves by Towers are getting lambasted. I'm not quite sure why so many here are so for them honestly. Even the local media is souring on the Towers era.

Anyways, regarding closers: A good year from a guy throwing in the 9th inning is worth something to a team trying to win a WS. However, the idea that only particular pitchers can accomplish that feat, or that there are pitchers that can be counted on year in and year out like Mo is a farce. Without looking it up, who was the closer for the Rangers teams in the WS? Is he closing now? How about the 2011 StL team. Same closer as the 2013 team? 2005 CHW WS team's closer? 2013 BOS closer was a proven name before last year?
 
Last edited:

82CardsGrad

7 x 70
Joined
Dec 31, 2004
Posts
36,146
Reaction score
8,070
Location
Scottsdale
Outside of the AZSF bubble the moves by Towers are getting lambasted. I'm not quite sure why so many here are so for them honestly. Even the local media is souring on the Towers era.

Anyways, regarding closers: A good year from a guy throwing in the 9th inning is worth something to a team trying to win a WS. However, the idea that only particular pitchers can accomplish that feat, or that there are pitchers that can be counted on year in and year out like Mo is a farce. Without looking it up, who was the closer for the Rangers teams in the WS? Is he closing now? How about the 2011 StL team. Same closer as the 2013 team? 2005 CHW WS team's closer? 2013 BOS closer was a proven name before last year?

So, in other words - you would've been ok had the Dbacks held onto Bell? Hmmm.... :eek:
 

DWKB

ASFN Icon
Joined
May 15, 2002
Posts
18,224
Reaction score
7,491
Location
Annapolis, MD
So, in other words - you would've been ok had the Dbacks held onto Bell? Hmmm.... :eek:

I'm saying that if I were GM and presented with the option of exchanging Bell, Davidson, and Holmberg for Addison Reed I'd have passed on the deal.
 

82CardsGrad

7 x 70
Joined
Dec 31, 2004
Posts
36,146
Reaction score
8,070
Location
Scottsdale
I'm saying that if I were GM and presented with the option of exchanging Bell, Davidson, and Holmberg for Addison Reed I'd have passed on the deal.

Got it. As always, time will tell... will be interesting to see how it all plays out later in 2014.
 

Lefty

ASFN Icon
Joined
Jul 4, 2002
Posts
12,566
Reaction score
954
Another great signing by Mr. Genius, Valverde signed to a minor league contract. Towers is releagie contract. Towers is really reaching. Does he even have a plan for the future? I can't wait until he is gone, hopefully sooner than later.
 

Dback Jon

Doing it My Way
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
82,028
Reaction score
41,818
Location
South Scottsdale
Another great signing by Mr. Genius, Valverde signed to a minor league contract. Towers is releagie contract. Towers is really reaching. Does he even have a plan for the future? I can't wait until he is gone, hopefully sooner than later.

Val Verde being signed to a minor-league contract is cause for concern???

Nothing will change if we get a new GM you'll just overreact to every move that GM makes as well
 

overseascardfan

ASFN Addict
Joined
Apr 9, 2005
Posts
8,807
Reaction score
2,096
Location
Phoenix
They aren't. Good ones anyway. The one's who aren't replacable aren't allowed to hit FA.

Grant Balfour is out there, really old but a very reliable closer. There are other names out there but my point is compared to SP & hitters, the RP market is saturated.
 

Lefty

ASFN Icon
Joined
Jul 4, 2002
Posts
12,566
Reaction score
954
Val Verde being signed to a minor-league contract is cause for concern???

Nothing will change if we get a new GM you'll just overreact to every move that GM makes as well

Signing Valverde is desperation. He is hoping to find lightning in a bottle. I know you are a Towers fan but he does not know what direction to take this team. First he gets rid of players who are free swingers and wants more grit and smallball. After two years of that, he decides he wants to go with more power and gets rid of some of those gritty players. He keeps overtrading, trying to put a square peg into a circle. I keep waiting for the news that he has traded Bradley.
 

Dback Jon

Doing it My Way
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
82,028
Reaction score
41,818
Location
South Scottsdale
Teams sign lots of vets to minor league contacts every year. To bitch about this is obsessive hate
 

BC867

Long time Phoenician!
Joined
Sep 16, 2002
Posts
17,827
Reaction score
1,709
Location
NE Phoenix
Another great signing by Mr. Genius, Valverde signed to a minor league contract. Towers is releagie contract. Towers is really reaching. Does he even have a plan for the future? I can't wait until he is gone, hopefully sooner than later.

Wasn't Rod Barajas signed as a possible backup Catcher a year ago? He didn't make it past spring training. As a former D'back, he had a chance to show if he had something special at his age.

Do you really think it is any different now with Valverde?

No one would equate that with "a plan for the future".

I haven't reached a definite conclusion, one way or the other. Although I am more negative about KT than positive.

If you are trying to convince us that he is incompetent, you struck out using this as an example. It is like saying that a junior Senator once let some gas escape. Trivial!
 

Lefty

ASFN Icon
Joined
Jul 4, 2002
Posts
12,566
Reaction score
954
Wasn't Rod Barajas signed as a possible backup Catcher a year ago? He didn't make it past spring training. As a former D'back, he had a chance to show if he had something special at his age.

Do you really think it is any different now with Valverde?

No one would equate that with "a plan for the future".

I haven't reached a definite conclusion, one way or the other. Although I am more negative about KT than positive.

If you are trying to convince us that he is incompetent, you struck out using this as an example. It is like saying that a junior Senator once let some gas escape. Trivial!

I wasn't using Valverde as a plan for the future, I was using him as trying to find lightning in a bottle. As for the future, Towers has no plan, that is the problem. He is going to keep trading guys hoping somehow everything comes together. Teams are going to continue to try and trade with the Diamondbacks because they know they will be able to get more out of the trade.
 

DWKB

ASFN Icon
Joined
May 15, 2002
Posts
18,224
Reaction score
7,491
Location
Annapolis, MD
I'm curious if anyone has noticed that there are talks about "character issues" in essentially every guy we've traded the past couple of years.

Is the feeling here that this is always the case, that it is good to be aired out loud, and that it has no effect on our ability to leverage our position during trades?
 

82CardsGrad

7 x 70
Joined
Dec 31, 2004
Posts
36,146
Reaction score
8,070
Location
Scottsdale
I'm curious if anyone has noticed that there are talks about "character issues" in essentially every guy we've traded the past couple of years.

Is the feeling here that this is always the case, that it is good to be aired out loud, and that it has no effect on our ability to leverage our position during trades?

I haven't heard anything like that about Skaggs, Holmberg or Davidson? Did hear it about Eaton, which was also mentioned by Gambo... Of course, we know Upton had that tag but I don't recall anyone from the Dbacks saying that about him...




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
PDXChris

PDXChris

All In!
Supporting Member
Banned from P+R
Joined
Mar 28, 2003
Posts
31,417
Reaction score
28,078
Location
Nowhere
Another great signing by Mr. Genius, Valverde signed to a minor league contract. Towers is releagie contract. Towers is really reaching. Does he even have a plan for the future? I can't wait until he is gone, hopefully sooner than later.

Val Verde being signed to a minor-league contract is cause for concern???

Nothing will change if we get a new GM you'll just overreact to every move that GM makes as well

Signing Valverde is desperation. He is hoping to find lightning in a bottle. I know you are a Towers fan but he does not know what direction to take this team. First he gets rid of players who are free swingers and wants more grit and smallball. After two years of that, he decides he wants to go with more power and gets rid of some of those gritty players. He keeps overtrading, trying to put a square peg into a circle. I keep waiting for the news that he has traded Bradley.

I wasn't using Valverde as a plan for the future, I was using him as trying to find lightning in a bottle. As for the future, Towers has no plan, that is the problem. He is going to keep trading guys hoping somehow everything comes together. Teams are going to continue to try and trade with the Diamondbacks because they know they will be able to get more out of the trade.

As I pointed out n the other thread, we did not sign him. The report was false.

10:25am: Valverde told Enrique Rojas of ESPN Deportes that he does not have a deal with the Diamondbacks and has recently switched agents. Formerly with Scott Boras, he is now represented by Praver/Shapiro (Spanish Twitter links).
 

DWKB

ASFN Icon
Joined
May 15, 2002
Posts
18,224
Reaction score
7,491
Location
Annapolis, MD
I haven't heard anything like that about Skaggs, Holmberg or Davidson? Did hear it about Eaton, which was also mentioned by Gambo... Of course, we know Upton had that tag but I don't recall anyone from the Dbacks saying that about him...




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Rumors about Davidson are out there. Add to that Bauer, Young, and Drew.
 

82CardsGrad

7 x 70
Joined
Dec 31, 2004
Posts
36,146
Reaction score
8,070
Location
Scottsdale
Rumors about Davidson are out there. Add to that Bauer, Young, and Drew.

Haven't heard a thing about Davidson, anywhere... Same for Drew. As for CY - the only negative comments I ever heard came from this board and some local sports talk jocks... never from the team. And, as for Bauer... well, if you would like to defend his personality, go for it... ;)
 

DWKB

ASFN Icon
Joined
May 15, 2002
Posts
18,224
Reaction score
7,491
Location
Annapolis, MD
Haven't heard a thing about Davidson, anywhere... Same for Drew. As for CY - the only negative comments I ever heard came from this board and some local sports talk jocks... never from the team. And, as for Bauer... well, if you would like to defend his personality, go for it... ;)

You might not have personally heard, but that doesn't mean they aren't out there ( or were out there). They are/were and I would bet other organizations who are naturally more in the know than you have heard them.

It's become common knowledge about this FO and their whispers being to loud in their trade chips.
 
Top