J. C. Bradbury on Dayton Moore's Love That Dare Not Speak Its Name

I'm just linking to a column that makes some... interesting points. Bradbury is the well-regarded author of Sabernomics, both the book and the blog, as well as a Braves fan.

Before following the link, it might be fun to guess who the antecedents of the pronouns in the following sentence are: "Seriously? They LOVE his mental makeup, after the juvenile tantrum he threw last year about his being sent down while being the worst everyday player in baseball?"

Worst everyday player in baseball? How dare you forget about Tony Pena, Jr., Mr. Bradbury, how dare you.

about 1 month ago devil_fingers Comment 24 comments 0 recs |

Read Related

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Hmmmm

I they love his mental makeup and he appears to be a selfish flake, it must mean he’s an evangelical Christian.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Nov 9, 2008 6:00 PM EST 0 recs

i think he left out like 6 former braves in his catalogue as well

by royalsreview on Nov 9, 2008 7:29 PM EST 0 recs

Why people care about this continues to elude me.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Nov 9, 2008 8:00 PM EST up 0 recs

to quote JC Bradbury

It’s not that acquiring these players were necessarily bad moves, but I think that fans should have a right to be worried when a GM seems attached to things that he once saw as great in his mind’s eye.

I guess the question, then, is why should we be worried? J.C. didn’t really answer that, except to say that this behavior is what lands you guys like Stuart Gray. I don’t think we’ve done anything like that, but if we give up something big for Francouer, then perhaps we’ll have crossed the threshold.

This space intentionally left blank.

by marbotty on Nov 10, 2008 4:32 AM EST up 0 recs

Fans should worry if this affinity for current or former Braves leads to bad moves

I don’t have the exhaustive list of players-ever-in-the-Braves-organization that Moore has acquired, but let’s look at the players Bradbury mentioned:

Odalis Perez – short-term place holder, and I think the prospects the Royals got were the real reason for this trade [very minor acquisition]
Tony Pena – he took a flyer on a defense-only SS. Definitely a poor move that he stuck with for a bit too long [moderately significant acquisition]
Kyle Davies – in the very least he got good value for a two-month rental of Dotel. He might pan out as a 4/5 starter, or perhaps a good reliever. I think it is hard for anyone to have a problem with this acquisition. [mildly significant acquisition]
Brayan Pena – waiver claim which added something decent to minor league catching depth. Could easily be a decent, cheap backup catcher option. [very minor acquisition]
Horacio Ramirez - minor league free agent scrap heap reclamation project which worked out pretty well and was turned into a toolsy fringe prospect. This acquisition helped the major league team for a time and ended up adding to the minor league system. [very minor acquisition]

I can’t remember which other players are on this list. Roman Colon? Cuevas? My point is that the vast majority of this “huge number” of former Braves acquisitions have been extremely minor moves, mostly at the minor league level. And unless I’m forgetting someone significant, only Pena has hurt the team. The rest have either been small positives or complete non-factors at the major league level.

Yes, trading something of any significance for Francoeur would be a total bonehead move. I’ll be happy to criticize such a move if it happens.

So, given the nature of these acquisitions of former Braves, I ask again, why should we care?

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Nov 10, 2008 5:32 AM EST up 0 recs

My main reason for this link was, of course, the humor

which I take very seriously.

Having said that, the TPJ acquisition all depends on what happens with Cordier — I have no idea what will. Some people say he’ll be lucky to pitch an inning the majors, some think he’s still a prospect for the rotation. If the latter, then it’s a bad move in the end. If he never sees the majors or even becomes a Nunez-esque reliever, I’d actually say DMGM “won” the trade, because, although, yeah, they stuck with TPJ too long, but for one season he gave near-league average production for the minimum, and that’s nothing to scoff at (probably around $8M surplus value).

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by devil_fingers on Nov 10, 2008 9:43 AM EST up 0 recs

I don't mind the post, the link or the joke

It’s just that this “joke” is sometimes used as a criticism. It’s as if people have a problem with Moore using a waiver claim or a minor league contract on a player if he has ever been in the Braves organization….because that is bad…for some reason. And I just don’t get it. If someone can explain to me why it is bad that Dayton Moore has acquired a couple handfuls of former Braves in largely minor, meaningless moves, I’d like to hear it. Maybe I’m just missing something.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Nov 10, 2008 10:08 AM EST up 0 recs

Kaegel speculates on the Royals website mailbag

that Odalis might be a candidate to return!

So, is he a “short-term place holder”, or a long-term disaster?

Mr Glass, this is a pro sports team, not a retail store - run it like one!

by loyal2sdad on Nov 10, 2008 10:56 AM EST up 0 recs

Right now, he's a rumor

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Nov 10, 2008 11:04 AM EST up 0 recs

The danger is

Instead of going after the most qualified player, he goes after what is comfortable. These may be “minor moves”, but sometimes minor moves turn into great moves. There is the small possibility he’s passing over the next Carlos Pena so he can get Brayan Pena, because he’s an ex-Braves.

Its not a huge worry in my opinion, and I think we also have the advantage of DM knowing these guys better than other teams do. But its a slight worry.

And it is kinda funny.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Nov 10, 2008 10:58 AM EST up 0 recs

The danger is Instead of going after the most qualified player, he goes after what is comfortable.

If that’s what is happening, that’s bad. I don’t think we have any evidence that is what is happening.

These may be "minor moves", but sometimes minor moves turn into great moves. There is the small possibility he’s passing over the next Carlos Pena so he can get Brayan Pena, because he’s an ex-Braves.

Again, if we had evidence of this, then it would be a valid criticism. But without that evidence, is it valid to criticize him for acquiring former Braves, mostly as organizational filler?

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Nov 10, 2008 11:07 AM EST up 0 recs

We have evidence that he favors ex-Braves

The mere fact we have a disproportionate amount of ex-Braves shows he favors them at the expense of more qualified players (unless you think ex-Braves just all happen to be the most qualified). It may matter, it may not, we don’t know if he has passed over the next Ryan Ludwick yet.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Nov 10, 2008 11:11 AM EST up 0 recs

The mere fact we have a disproportionate amount of ex-Braves shows he favors them at the expense of more qualified players

The fact that we have a disproportionate amount of ex-Braves does not at all mean that we have them at the expense of more qualified players. That conclusion does not logically follow your premise. The acquisition of cheap, essentially free players like B. Pena and H. Ramirez does not mean that there were necessarily better free talent that he could have acquired on the waiver wire or in a minor league contract. Somehow you are assuming that he is acquiring ex-Braves and eschewing more qualified players. I don’t know where you’re getting this from. What evidence do you have of that? Certainly the number of ex-Braves he has acquired doesn’t provide any evidence of that.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Nov 10, 2008 11:18 AM EST up 0 recs

I don't see how it doesn't

Unless you somehow think that its a coincedence that all the best players to pick up just happened to be ex-Braves, then he is most certainly passing over better players in favor of ex-Braves. If I am the boss of my company, and I pick my friends to by my employees, I have passed over more qualified people. Now, my friends may be qualified too, but there is no doubt I have passed over some more qualified candidates.

Its just a matter of whether the players he’s passing over are marginally better, or if he’s passing over someone ready to explode, Gload-style.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Nov 10, 2008 11:20 AM EST up 0 recs

It appears that you are arguing that any time any organization has a proportion of players acquired from another organization which is greater than a random, equal distribution then they are necessarily passing over better players. This is clearly fallacious. First, talent is not distributed equally among the various organizations. Second, each acquisition was a distinct event based on availability, need, talent and cost (among other factors). It was certainly possible, for instance, that Davies was the best available player the Royals could get for Dotel, that H. Ramirez was the best available cheap, minor league contract reclamation project they could sign and that B. Pena was the best free waiver claim catcher they could get to increase catching depth in the system.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Nov 10, 2008 11:39 AM EST up 0 recs

So you think

The best players available just happened to be ex-Braves, which also just happens to be the organization Dayton used to work for?

Okay.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Nov 10, 2008 11:46 AM EST up 0 recs

The best players available just happened to be ex-Braves, which also just happens to be the organization Dayton used to work for?

I think that the acquisitions Moore has made of Braves represent a fairly small minority of all of the acquisitions he’s made since he came to the Royals. And no, those acquisitions were not coincidental. He knew a lot about these players and thought that they were worth the roster spot, money or talent it took to acquire them. And again, the fact that the proportion of Braves he acquired is greater than you’d get from a random distribution does not at all necessitate that he passed over better players who were of equal cost and value to the Royals.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Nov 10, 2008 11:52 AM EST up 0 recs

We agree then

“He knew a lot about these players and thought that they were worth the roster spot, money or talent it took to acquire them.”

So he does favor ex-Braves at the expense of other players. Which may be good or may not be good. But he is passing over more qualified candidates.

I don’t expect there to be a normal random distribution, but the weight towards the team he used to work for tells me he is favoring players from his old organization. Were it ex-Twins he was collecting, we would just chalk it up to sample size. But this is no coincedence, he favors ex-Braves to his detriment or benefit.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Nov 10, 2008 11:54 AM EST up 0 recs

So he does favor ex-Braves at the expense of other players. Which may be good or may not be good. But he is passing over more qualified candidates.

No, we don’t agree at all. The mere fact that he has, at times, picked Braves does not necessarily mean that the other players he didn’t acquire were more qualified. He thought that the Braves in question were the best available player at the time.

The White Sox have a disproportionate number of former Royals and former Diamondbacks in their system. Does this necessarily mean that Kenny Williams is passing over more qualified players so he can get former Royals and Diamondbacks? Of course not.

But this is no coincedence, he favors ex-Braves to his detriment or benefit.

No, it is not a coincidence. He’s got more information and, perhaps inside information on these Braves. Having information is a good thing. If he’s a good GM, then he’s using the information he has wisely. He’s not just blindly picking up any and every current or former Brave he can get his hands on. He’s picking up the best players available to fit the Royals organizational needs. And he’s using his in depth knowledge of some Braves to help him figure out who is the best available and who is worth acquiring.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Nov 10, 2008 12:04 PM EST up 0 recs

every other team in baseball passed over Ryan Ludwick

that should tell us something. He’s only been worth about 7 or at the most 8 wins above replacement since then.

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by devil_fingers on Nov 10, 2008 11:21 AM EST up 0 recs

j/k of course

Except that I TOTALLY saw it coming. Just like I did with Aviles, Meche, Carlos Pena, Rick Ankiel’s resurrection as an outfielder, and so on.

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by devil_fingers on Nov 10, 2008 11:22 AM EST up 0 recs

guess is francoeur, now let me see the answer...

by playingwithfire on Nov 9, 2008 8:33 PM EST 0 recs

I still remember a story

About the Charlotte Hornets, when picking in the expansion draft, passed over valuable bench player Vinnie “The Microwave” Johnson from the NBA Champion Pistons because the owner insisted “he wasn’t a starter.”

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Nov 10, 2008 10:57 AM EST 0 recs

I was going to make a comment

that if DMGM has to trade away Butler to the Braves, that I hoped it was for Kelly Johnson, since he’s a pretty good little hitter for a 2B. Then I saw his defensive numbers… I take it back, Xenu. Send Yunel Escobar instead!

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by devil_fingers on Nov 10, 2008 11:58 AM EST 0 recs