Marlon Byrd for John Lannan Opportunity Exists
So John Lannan lost his arbitration case to the Nationals and wil be paid $5M for next season (as opposed to $5.7M he was asking). Now that the money is settled, the Nats are trying to move Lannan for a position player, preferably a center fielder, so that they can sign Edwin Jackson instead. I'm not quite sure why they want to make that swap, but that seems to be the goal for them. If the Cubs cared to add another mediocre pitcher with 2 years of club control while moving Marlon Byrd and the one year left on his contract, while saving about $1.5M, it appears a match could be made.
I certainly don't see the Cubs doing it, not much difference between Paul Maholm and Lannan and it seems that the pitching depth problem has been more than solved. And if you're a fan of FIP, Lannan's numbers are worse than what he's actually put up. But on some level it could make some sense, especially if the Cubs are afraid they won't have a taker in 2 months for Byrd. And they do have Reed Johnson, Tony Campana, Brett Jackson, David DeJesus and possibly Yoenis Cespedes that can step up in center field if Byrd is moved.
Speaking of arbitration, Matt Garza's case is heard tomorrow. Once that's settled, I wouldn't be surprised for the rumor mongering to start up again, once teams are certain of his cost.
The Cub offense is in on the con.
1-for-10 so far w/RISP.
swing and a miss.
i'm gonna like...go stand over there. *points*
This is all a long con by Arrieta to lull playoff opponents.
the factual correction on your mistakes on your post that I barely bothered to read the first time because it had nothing to do with anything I wanted to talk about is indeed a sign of my degenerative brain condition. I appreciate the safety tip and will be looking into with extreme urgency now.
it took you 4 posts to get to this?
have you checked the batteries in your carbon monoxide detector?
Fwiw, Billy Hamilton's actual WAR numbers that relate to the ones that I posted for Mike Trout are:
- 2014: 2.5
- 2015: 1.0
- 2016: 2.6
But by all means #crunchsplain on the stupidity of WAR while exaggerating your points. I can't wait to read more.
Thanks for the awesome give and take today and for the 535 words you spilled filling in all the gaps that I woefully neglected. We're all a little wiser and better for it. I look forward to your play-by-play summary later in the comments.
it was about a post comparing players based on WAR...and comparing WAR values of a CF to a slew of other players...a post that you made...and i made a comment...that talked about D weighting of WAR...and comparinging WAR values of a CF to a slew of other players...etc etc...
hell, we didn't even get in deep. i didn't even involve UZR or FIP versions and their strengths/weaknesses...or position mandated "handicapping" in points...etc.
let's not talk about that...cool, fine, awesome. context sucks. san dimas highschool football rules.
Thanks for shining a light on this very important topic and steering it away from the frivolity that was the awesomenes of Mike Trout, but moreso on the foolishness of WAR as a metric to judge the value of center fielders. We're all a little wiser now and your contributions are invaluable to this community and to America's pastime. God Bless!
so...what's chan-yong lim up to these days?
yes, those hamilton WAR numbers are very reasonable. i'm on your side now based on that biting commentary and reasoning of why he's a 3.5-ish WAR player over a 600 PA season.
those numbers are obviously well deserved and worthy of no scrutiny...none at all. no issue.
CF D is rarer than a jon lester pickoff at 2nd...totally irreplaceable...no way in hell there's good D, low/no-hitting CF's in anyone's system that could do what hamilton is doing. guys like this don't exist...you get like, 2-3 at any given time in history.
Please do not discuss War here. I think the Cub Reporter should be politics free.
But yes, whether you support War or Peace...Mike Trout is ridiculously consistent and good.