Sunday, May 26, 2024
Home > LADR YouTube Channel > Puig for Stanton? I Make that Trade (and Review Beer) on This New Video

Puig for Stanton? I Make that Trade (and Review Beer) on This New Video

In today’s video, we talk about the on again/off again retirement of Andre Ethier, and I jump on the Giancarlo Stanton bandwagon. If the Dodgers can grab him at the right price, bring him back home to LA!

In addition, I review a Death By Coconut, a flavored porter from Oskar Blues Brewing. Enjoy!

Oscar Martinez

I was born in the shadow of Dodger Stadium and immediately drenched in Dodger Blue. Chavez Ravine is my baseball cathedral, Vin Scully was the golden voice of summer all my life, and Tommy Lasorda remains the greatest Dodgers manager ever. My favorite things are coffee, beer, and the Dodgers beating the Giants. I also blog about my baseball card hobby at All Trade Bait, All the Time.

More Posts - Website

Follow Me:

Oscar Martinez
I was born in the shadow of Dodger Stadium and immediately drenched in Dodger Blue. Chavez Ravine is my baseball cathedral, Vin Scully was the golden voice of summer all my life, and Tommy Lasorda remains the greatest Dodgers manager ever. My favorite things are coffee, beer, and the Dodgers beating the Giants. I also blog about my baseball card hobby at All Trade Bait, All the Time.

54 thoughts on “Puig for Stanton? I Make that Trade (and Review Beer) on This New Video

  1. Oscar, there is one huge flaw in your trading Puig for Stanton. Mattingly hates Puig. And Puig feels pretty much the same way about DM. Puig is under team control at a reasonable price for 2 more years and he is a better defender than Stanton.

    1. You assume Mattingly will still be there next year.

      Pugilistic is the best RF in the NL. I have no idea what the defensive metrics say about Stanton.

      But we know FAZ doesn’t care as much about defense as they do about swings which score runs.

      1. I am not assuming Artie. I read the story last week where Jeter said that Mattingly will be the manager next season. I did not make the statement before I checked the facts. DM will be the Marlins skipper when the season begins. And if FAZ does not care about defense, why has he acquired guys who are good defenders? If he cared about swings and scoring runs he would have dumped guys that strike out so much.

        1. Stanton is not bad on defense so that is not an issue, but it would take a lot more then Puig, to make that deal.

          But it depends on the money in the end.

  2. I think this is the latest on Stanton:

    The Giants reportedly made an offer to take on all of Stanton’s contract and give up players. Stanton meanwhile (reportedly) said a couple of days ago that he will veto a trade to the Giants (in addition to saying earlier that he will veto a trade to the Cardinals and the Red Sox). Giancarlo was also reported to having given a list of clubs that he would approve a trade to. My guess the list reads “Dodgers, Dodgers, (maybe the Angels …), nah – Dodgers, Yankees (yes I am just kidding, Mr. Jeters), Cubs (raise your hand if you believe me on this one), and the Dodgers.

    It will be an interesting next few days until the winter meetings.

  3. Latest from Dodgerblue. Dodgers willing to trade Yasmani Grandal according to John Paul Morosi. It is doubtful he will be non tendered as the Dodgers will let the arbitration process play out. Grandal predicted to receive a 7.7 million dollar contract. Grandal only caught 2 of 15 post season games.

    1. Cool article. I have always felt that Ned got a raw deal from the fans and the fact that the Dodgers had the best winning percentage while he was GM is proof. Yeah, he made some bad signings, but he made some gutsy trades and was not afraid of making a mistake. I think sometimes a GM can be over cautious.

  4. I read this last night, had something of a brain meltdown, so I read it again this morning. This is part of my ongoing effort to understand how FAZ thinks.

    Each pitch effects the outcome win percentage. These people actually have algorithms that figure that out in real time computations. My first thought with this was an umpire with an accuracy rate of 84% is grossly unacceptable.

    According to the WPS numbers, the Dodgers were involved in two snoozer series. In all honesty I believe we knew that as they unfolded. The World Series was exceptional right up until it wasn’t – as this author put it the game was essentially over after 8 outs. Still, the 7th most exciting World Series is not too bad. Bummer an olive was swallowed in Game 7. How to fix that? I don’t know – get there again and hope for a different outcome? Maybe win that critical game in which you had the lead before it goes to a Game 7? Every team has one goal and that is to win the last game of the season. That last game is played in late October or early November.

    This game, and all the math that is being used to figure out how to play it, and with whom to play it, is laser focused on ONE thing – WINS. The quantification continues.

    1. Badger

      Thanks I had a brain meltdown too, but I didn’t read every word, and I am not gong to read that again.

      That is way to much over analyzation, and to much busy work, for me.

      You had it right, when you said Kershaw has to make two good starts, and Kenley has to save every game he gets a chance to save, for the Dodgers to win a seven game series, called the World Series.

      I don’t look at that seventh game that much, because we should have won that series, before the seventh game.

      Our players gave our pitchers enough offense and run support, to make it to game seven, even after our top starters, didn’t give the team two good starts, and Kenley had trouble, saving every appearance he made..

      It was amazing we even made it to game seven, after Kershaw’s bad start, and Darvish’s two bad starts, and the fact, that Kenley allowed the Asros’s leftfielder, to hit a HR the other way, to tie that second game, after he had two strikes.

      We need to get another top starter, that pitches like a bulldog, in these important games, in the post season.

      1. MJ
        Any suggestions for this “Bulldog”? Surely you have someone in mind? Also, there were times the pitching staff could have used more run support or the Dodgers would have won the series. MJ, you can’t just cut out one game because you think the game should not have been played and our starters are the sole reason that the team lost. That is crazy!

        1. Package

          The Dodgers scored as many runs as the Astros did!

          The Dodgers scored 12 runs in the game Kershaw started, and we lost!

          And I expect more from two highly paid veteran pitchers,
          that a team with mostly young players!

          And most people feel the same way!

          This team kept coming back and scoring runs, when the pitchers lost there leads, but a team can only do so much on offense, to make up for three bad starts, by there top starters, in a seven game series, like the World Series is!

          And Wood showed both of these veteran pitchers, what it takes to win a game, without a pitcher’s best stuff!

          He actually put in a bulldog performance himself!

  5. Day after day of moderation.

    What’s going on Scott? Why aren’t you here checking on these things? Too busy with other internet ventures?

    I know it’s winter, things are slow, but 2 day old news and beer guzzling videos? This is what we get here?

    1. Sorry about the spam filter. Sometimes it glitches every once in a while. I try to check on it as much as I can.

      I should have a new article up later today or tonight but I’ll be busy most of the day. I’m planning on having new content up tonight and through the weekend. However there is nothing going on right now. There’s nearly no hot stove going on across the board other than Stanton rumors. There’s stuff I want to comment on so expect new content up soon. In the meantime chat with the guys and have a beer.

  6. Looking at the potential Stanton trade again. I wonder how big a differential there would be in HRs? If it was enough, Stanton might have another reason not to go to the Giants. Afterall in the end the totals will have and impact on how he is remembered as well as HOF numbers. Sooo, is it 1,5,10, more per year or is there no difference?

    1. Did you read the article about projected WAR with the different teams? If I remember correctly, no guarantee of that, he would put up fewer home runs in SF but just as much if not more WAR. And did you read the Hardball article about Win Percentage Added and Win Percentage Sum? Looks to me that by the time Stanton is eligible for the HOF what will be heavily weighted is his Wins Above Replacement. If he remains in the lineup his home run totals will be high no matter where he plays.

      Just got an email educating me on an insurance policy that Kazmir’s contract carries. I wasn’t aware of it but it makes sense. Vs. left handed hitters he has been pretty tough over his career. He’s got one year left at $17.667mm and allegedly insurance covers a great deal of that. He only projects at 36 innings next year. What if they were used as a LOOGY with insurance covering the loss? The $17.7mm counts toward the cap, but if insurance pays most of that, would another team be interested? Heck, in the right deal, I’ll let you guess which one, we could even agree to pick up a portion of the uninsured just to clear the $17.7mm.

      1. Badger

        I don’t know for sure, but I swore the Dodgers announcers said, that Kazmir, was more effective against righties, because of his change up.

        1. If they did say that they’re wrong. Just read his splits. He’s much harder on left handers and if he became a reliever at the end of his career I think he could last longer.

  7. The graph I read said Stanton would hit about .280 as a Dodger with 49 homers and 120 plus Ribbies his first year. He would hit better in SF supposedly.

  8. Too much analytics. Analytics tell you nothing about drive, work ethic or the desire to succeed. If you used analytics, the Dodgers never would have signed Justin Turner, thank you Ned Colletti for that one. I remember when scouts could listen to the sound of a pitch hitting the catchers glove and tell if a player had the kind of stuff to make it in the bigs. Now it is all graphs, pitch count, WAR, too many statistics and too many statistics that tell you nothing about the players makeup. I like the old way better.

    1. I do too, but in an effort to converse I’m reading about it. The more I do the more I value what I already knew. Slash lines have been around for a long time. I’ve valued OBP since the 60s. I didn’t need metrics to tell me Brooks Robinson and Willie Mays were great defenders.

      Analytics is here to stay. But the old guys who have played and coached for decades, those who know the game, can still enjoy it by watching. We know what we are looking at.

      1. You know it Badger. The game has changed for good. But I can still close my eyes and see Willie Mays streaking around the bases his cap flying off his head and sliding into third. I can Pete Rose and those head first dives into a base, and Sandy, those long arms dangling at his side as he goes into the windup and that fast ball zipping by hitters. Then when they are expecting the express, he breaks off that killer curve of his. Bob Gibson, staring down hitters and most of them afraid to dig in. And of course, Big D with that killer sidearm of his. Those were ball players.

  9. I’m all for metrics. I just think the current generation of SABRmetricians and bloggers, for the most part, are lazy and in many cases cherry pick stats to fit fanboy agendas. Which by the way, having favorite players and FOs is ok, as long as they realize it’s easy to see through them (for the most part they don’t realize it and just comes across as immature and pretentious know it alls).

    I would love to see stats on pitch sequencing, both from the batter and the pitchers view. Like what happens to hard hit rate when you throw 3 sliders in a row, or if you reverse the pitch sequence when a batter comes to bat the third time. This data is out there and old schoolers, as well as every player and coaching staff, kind of feel their way around this stuff during a game and over the course of a season. But everything I read merely focuses on pitch mix and velocity, without diving in deeper. This is like stud poker stats in the 30s and 40s, before the age of computers, when casinos know the win percentage of hands that are dealt, but cannot account for win percentage as the hands evolves as people raise and fold.

    Maybe the stats say pitch sequence does not matter. I seriously doubt that though. It just seems ignored and understudied because it takes more work. It’s like the fixation in WAR which has serious flaws (as Bill James himself said). In basketball they use stats based on win contribution as the fundamental stat, and actually for the most part those numbers line up with what you see on the court, the counting stats and the W-L records in the standings. Baseball could easily go to win contribution but they don’t, I think it’s just overall laziness, inertia and myopia, which ironically is what the first generation SABRmetriciand accuses the old schoolers of. I see the situation reversed – old timers are questioning the stats and it’s the stats geeks who suffer from laziness, inertia and myopia.

  10. WAR is designed to be all about Wins YF. It is continuing to evolve.

    I just looked at the career leaders in WAR. Only 3 modern day players are in the Top 20, and guess what they all have in common?

    1. That is what they are saying, Badger, but not doing. Bill James has criticized WAR because it does not give proper accounting to wins and losses. A better and more truthful name for WAR is Value Above Replacement. For example if you take two players with identical stats, one from a first place team and one from a last place team, in basketball the two players would have very different values. But in baseball the values would be the same (or nearly the same). That’s not taking wins and losses into account.

      I’m not questioning your use and reliance on WAR. I have to do the same too when evaluating MLB players but I know it’s a very flawed stat.

      1. It’s not MY use of WAR. Everywhere I look, at whatever complicated set of numbers I read, it’s all aimed at ONE target – WINS. And Wins Above Replacement is how every player from rookie league to the Majors is evaluated.

        As for being on a winning or losing team, I don’t think that should have anything to do with a players value to YOUR team. Take a look at Mike Trout’s Postseason stats. Look at Stanton’s. Ferguson Jenkins, Ernie Banks, Andre Dawson, hell even Ted Williams and Ty Cobb never won a World Series. WAR is about how much better you are than the schlub the team finds on the waiver wire (guys like Ryan Lavarnaway and Lars Anderson – ‘emember them?). Somebody like Stanton and Trout, who play on less than teams, would look very good playing for the Dodgers in next year’s World Series. Of course, we have already won the Division 5 times in a row. A couple of better players won’t change that. What do we need to win that last game? More better pitching is always my answer.

        1. All I am saying Badger, is that I use the stat all the same. But it is a flawed stat and I agree with Bill James that a WAR stat needs to take into account wins and losses. Not simply wins and losses, mind you, but there are ways to take those into account and achieve a true “Wins Above Replacement” stat, and not just a value above replacement stat. A value above replacement stat is still useful, but its not as helpful as the way that basketball does their WAR stat equivalent. The way they do it there (which includes the FOs, agents and the bloggers) is what I agree with, and I think NBA basketball has changed dramatically and for the better since these stats have come into play in the NBA (much less isolation play, more money handed out to versatile players rather than just based on scoring and counting stats). The MLB can do the same if they listen to Bill James and improve on the WAR stats.

          1. And by the way, Bill James was instrumental in contributing to the way basketball stats are measured and used. In basketball, people use PER and Win-Shares. The WAR number used in baseball is like the PER for basketball, which is an all-encompassing rating. Bill James contributed to the stat Win-Shares, which takes wins into account. Basketball FOs, agents and bloggers and fans use both. Earlier on, when we only had PER, we had isolation heavy slow pace basketball, and many debates about PER being overweighted to offense and counting stats, not enough to how speed, role players and defense impact the game (sound familiar)? I would venture that old school guys like me, who loved the 80s basketball, hated the PER. The best way to get a lot of PER was to create isolation and get fouled, no matter what the circumstances. Meanwhile everyone watches and when the game is on the line and you double team, the other shooters are out of rhythm. So I am carrying that bias to MLB, I suppose, but it is just crazy to me that baseball does not have an equivalent to Win-Shares after all this time. And my personal opinion is most of the NBA teams now pay as much attention to Win-Shares as PER, especially the top teams like the Warriors and the Celtics, who play a fast pace team game that is much more aesthetically pleasing to watch.

  11. I still trust the eye test. That’s just me. All the sabermetrics in the world do not register heart. It does not take a computer to figure out where Yasmani Grandal’s weakness is, nor that Cody has a hole in his swing. I can see when a pitcher is losing his effectiveness and velocity. As for WAR, well in the Dodgers long and illustrious history, no Dodger has a WAR over 68. 67 is the highest WAR and that belongs to Big D. Of course the career WAR leader is Babe Ruth with a career WAR of 183.7. The 3 in the top 20 who Badger mentioned? Bonds, Clemens and Rodriguez. All accused of PED use. Here is another thing, Greinke has a higher career WAR than Kershaw. So does Utley.

    1. This is wrong in my opinion, but valid in Michael’s obviously.

      The reason I find it wrong is that baseball doesn’t happen in a vacuum. The exact opposite these days. If Grandal has a weakness striking out, the league will try to strike him out more. If Bellinger is cold against the down and in slider, then pitchers will pitch him there and his OPS will go down. Accordingly his WAR will.

      Similarly, in an earlier post Michael wondered if a poor work habit or a lack of desire to succeed would show up. Again, the answer is yes without a doubt. If players don’t work hard, they do poorly (see early years Puig, Yasiel) if they don’t have a desire, they will do poorly.

      As a result of either (lack of work skills, lack of desire) these players will have lower WAR than they should.


      Greinke’s career war is 56.9
      Kershaw’s is 57.4

      Last time I checked (and this is via BaseballReference) the latter is higher.

      Finally, the last way I want a scout evaluating a pitcher is based on the sound a catcher’s mitt makes upon encountering a pitch.

      1. I tend to agree with Bluto on stats being used to derive conclusions about non-stats-like things. I think heart, dedication, do show up over time, you have to look at stats and improvement over time. George Springer’s SOs decreased over time – I am counting on Bellinger to follow a similar trend. Clutch-ness does show up too, over time – an easy and relevant stats is triple slash when down in late innings and runner in scoring position. Seager’s overall numbers were the same this year, with higher strikeouts, but his triple slash with runners in scoring in position jumped. I believe Turner’s triple slash improved as well.

        In fact, I also think “character” shows up over time as well, but we need better stats that actually take win-loss and shared playing time into account. That is what they do in basketball – they have plus-minus stats, for every single combination of players, down to each possession. Baseball has the same stats but these are not used, or underused.

        But in any case stats are stats – they are tools. And on water cooler issues like heart, dedication, clutch-ness is very easy to cherry pick stats to make a whole host of arguments in all directions. There are lies, damned lies, and statistics.

      2. I checked 5 minutes ago on the same list. Greinke’s WAR is listed as 60.7 Kershaw’s at 59.4. Only other active players higher than those guys are Sabathia, Utley, Cano, Cabrera, Pujols and Beltre. There is no way to measure a players heart in the stats. Oh sure, after you have seen him play a few years and he shows a grit that is not there in his OBP or what ever other stat you want to bring up you can judge him. As for the sound a pitch makes hitting the catchers glove, it can tell you a lot, and you Bluto obviously never heard that sound. Scouts in the old days did not have the tools these guys today use and they found some pretty damn good ballplayers. Koufax’s fastball had a different sound. There are people in today’s game that scouts have said, the ball just sounds different coming off their bat. It is not the only tool they use, but it means something to them. I care less what you think Bluto since you obviously think your opinion is the only one that matters anyway. I like the old way better. I think the ball players were better. They either got the job done or they did not. All these stats the geeks come up with mean very little to me. I focus on Batting average, runs scored, runs driven in, fielding percentage and in my starting pitcher, innings pitched and wins. I give a crap less if he gives up 30 homers if he wins 20 and helps my team to the playoffs. All that other crap is so the geeks can make themselves feel important.

          1. That’s what I just looked at Bluto, maybe it did not factor in this year yet, but the graph I read had Greinke above Kershaw.

          2. Why are guys comparing total WAR? Kershaw has been better than Greinke. The numbers are close, but Greinke has 4 more years in the league. Greinke did have that 9.3 WAR contract year at age 31. Can we expect that out of Kershaw in his contract year? (age 30). I really doubt it. Greinke, 4 years older, was better than Kershaw last year, but will he do that again? I don’t really care, but I wouldn’t be surprised. Kershaw is showing cracks.

        1. No particular reason Badger. I just was looking at the graph after you had mentioned the PED guys who were on the leaderboard and then I found where Kershaw was and just looked to see who was above him. I was surprised Greinke was there. Yep, Kershaw is showing cracks. So did Greinke in 2016. He rebounded some last year, but had some really bad games too. And he was rocked in the playoffs.

  12. Yueh_Fei great points!

    I don’t have any problem with rethinking and evaluating baseball from a different point of view. But in the end it is entertainment.

    I enjoy the esthetics and beauty of the game. And I find nothing entertaining nor esthetically pleasing about a ball player (regardless of how spectacular his WAR is) jogging out a ground ball, admiring his triple he turned into a double because he failed to run out of the box on contact (do you hear me Joc), or any ball player who waits for the umpire to make a call before he decides to move.

    Yes the game has changed. But I don’t blame the underwriters, actuaries, or game theorists. I blame the players for giving us very imprecise baseball these days.

    But I still love the game!

    1. The best way to evaluate any player, is to use all of the tools you have on hand, from both generations.

      Because as much as numbers are precise, they are not the only way to evaluate a player.

      Because some of these saber metric equations have there issues, and because of that, they are not precise.

      Just the fact that sabers equate walks as hits, and they equate strike outs, the same as other outs, is a big mistake, if you really know baseball.

  13. The Marlins leaked out another report, saying they are willing to trade Stanton to the Giants for Panik, 2 prospects, and the Giants taking on most of Stanton’s contract. Sounds like a good deal for the Marlins, and the Giants get what they want (not necessarily what they need, in my view).

    But all this stuff in the press just seems to me that the real negotiation is going on between the Marlins and Stanton. I am not so sure public negotiations work, and actually Stanton could help the Marlins the most by dragging his feet and maybe the Giants will pony up more in prospects or take on the entire contract.

    1. Another article, this one by Heyman not sure who wrote the one YF cited, ponders if the Dodgers are still the favorite to land him:

      Here’s the gist:
      The Dodgers are said to be “playing it cool so far,” which might be a strategy, or might actually be a sign they see this as a long shot at best. People familiar with their situation still suggest such a mega-deal isn’t likely (though not necessarily impossible).

      “It would take some creative financing to (land Stanton) and maneuver around the tax,” one person familiar with their situation said, stopping short of ruling it out.

      Meanwhile, the Dodgers are expected to continue to play it cool – like they did with Yu Darvish, when they waited for the Rangers to come back to them.

      Stanton isn’t saying anything publicly, understandably, but a friend of his now says, “I think he wants to be a Dodger.”

        1. Looks like there is more smoke for this fire

          Source : SF Giants front office executives are now in Los Angeles to meet with representatives of NL MVP Giancarlo Stanton.

          1. Looking from the outside in, here is my take on what’s happening.

            Marlins are saying to the Giants, we are happy with your package, but it’s your job to convert Giancarlo. All we can do is set up a first meeting with you and his agent.

            I’ve seen these types of meetings before. They will be like those meetings the Lakers had recently with top NBA players. Stanton will get paid regardless. His agent is going to ask, how are the Giants going to win after this deal? Because of you don’t even get into the postseason in two years, it’s going to get nasty with the fan base and even if SF is such a great place to live, it can get bad quickly if the team is a loser.

            If the Marlins – Giants discussions had legs, I don’t think they would be sending the Giants so meet with Stanton’s agents, and there would not be public posturing in the press.

            I see this as a last ditch effort by the Giants to save their deal. It could happen but I’d be surprised if Stanton is not still a Marlin after Jan 1.

  14. Good stuff in here tonight.

    I do understand most of what YF is saying, though I do not know as much about basketball as I do baseball. Heart and hustle are important, and likely difficult to quantify but it could be done. Clutch is something we all know exists, but great teams, teams that win over 100, clutch isn’t as important as it is for those teams that are scratching all the way to the finish line. We cruised right up to the World Series, where we didn’t grade out particularly well in clutch. WRISP numbers tell a lot of course, The best in MLB? Houston. The Dodgers? 25th.

    I’ve felt for a while that Stanton would end up in SF. Clearly they want him, and need him, more than we do. Will FAZ step up with a competitive offer? May not be necessary. Will Stanton go to a city and team he really doesn’t want to go to? To get out of Miami he may have to. He could do worse than San Francisco. They will figure out a way to win.

      1. I’ve seen it written that the giants are hamstrung with bad contracts. Yeah. Maybe. But I believe they have plenty of money and they damn sure know how to win. Last year could have been a fluke. Who knows what else they might have in mind after Stanton.

        Boxberger sure appeared to come cheap. The Dbacks took a step.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Optionally add an image (JPEG only)