Ugh, not a good start. It's my first-ever Jargon post, and I've already messed up the title. Because really, this section isn't about defending Dickerson — as I'll explain, I actually agree with much of Jimmy's critique of him. It's more about defending the seemingly dismissed logic behind the move — or any move like this, for that matter.
But now, that's changed. (And as a side note, he may bar me from ever writing another post again, because this is absurdly long. You've been warned. Feel free to bail now. In fact, I'd recommend it).
As part of his latest entry, Jimmy devoted a surprising amount of time to tearing apart Rockies LF Corey Dickerson. Before we get into the crux of my counter-argument, let's establish two important considerations that Jimmy didn't address in his entry, but that are key when evaluating my end of the trade.
A) Dickerson was not acquired to be a key cornerstone piece of my lineup. Heck, he's not even my starting LF (that title will belong to Hanley Ramirez). He was acquired simply to supplement my offense from the utility spot and to provide above-average depth and allowance for future trades.
B) What I gave up to get Dickerson — from my own roster planning standpoint — was practically nothing (At least nothing for my roster... I'll explain that later). It was the epitome of a low-risk, high-reward move.
As I said, Jimmy spent a fair amount of time detailing all of Dickerson's perceived warts. Once it was all distilled down, Jimmy seemed to have two main, overarching points.
A) Dickerson will regress this year.
B) Therefore, it was ill-advised to trade for him.
My take? Jimmy is right - at least about Part A. What surprised me though (and what prompted me to write this response) is that he would then make the presumptuous leap to Part B — as if it were an airtight mathematical equation with no variables to consider. Does expected regression make a player automatically unworthy of pursuit? Jimmy uses a variety of stats to seemingly try to make this point (BABIP, LH/RH splits, Home/Away splits, etc). The assumption seems to be that I must have been unaware of these stats and metrics, otherwise I surely would have never pursued Dickerson. On the contrary.
I did thorough, thorough research on Dickerson before I asked about him in a trade. I processed all the stats Jimmy mentioned, and then some. And like Jimmy, I concluded that some regression, at least in some categories, seemed very possible.
But what does that mean, practically speaking? This is a young guy just entering his prime who hit .312 with 24 HR and 76 RBIs in only 436 ABs last year. For the sake of argument, let's say he regresses to the point where he hits only .270 with 20 HRs and 70 RBIs. You know what that makes him? Hunter Pence. If that's his floor, then it seems like a very low-risk move.
But what about that oft-mentioned .356 BABIP? Is it sustainable? Of course not. But what Jimmy didn't mention is that Dickerson was a career .323 hitter throughout his time in the Minor Leagues. Or that Dickerson also owns a whopping 26.5% line drive rate. And that that line drive rate, combined with his playing in Coors Field (a park that always boosts BABIP), means that that .356 BABIP may not drop as far as you might think. Again, I doubt he hits .312 again. But I'm guessing he'll be closer to .300 than .260.
Also, while Jimmy categorized Dickerson as a strictly platoon guy (and he has been in the past), the Rockies plan on playing him more against lefties this year. Granted, that should mean more strikeouts and a lower batting average. But it also means an inevitable uptick in all counting stats. Which means a run at 30 HR and 100 RBI isn't out of the question. All told, you've got a guy with a ceiling as an above .300, 30-HR, 100-RBI hitter... and a floor of around .260, 20 HRs, 70 RBIs. Either way, it's a healthy asset to any offense.
Another key point that made this trade an easy decision for me is this: Dickerson, no matter where he ends up on the stat sheet, will do all that as a Minor League keeper. Which makes his value even higher. Because whether he's the .300/30/100 guy or the .260/20/70 guy... either way, he's not replacing one of my core guys. He's adding to them and lengthening my lineup. Those will all be bonus stats that I can tally in addition to my core 7 vets, and which in turn will allow me to address other needs in the draft.
Before we wrap up this marathon section, let's revisit some of the "trade variables" that I alluded to earlier. As we all know, trades are not made in a vacuum. We make them within the context of our team's short and long-term objectives.
In this instance, the context for me was that barring some unforeseen circumstances, I was never going to keep Pablo Sandoval. And that's not a knock on Panda. I actually really like Panda and I think he'll put up career numbers for Chalupa's beloved BoSox this year. But I had determined that I had better veteran keeper options than Panda... and I knew that I would either trade for a 3B that I liked better (which I did in Todd Frazier), or I would simply address 3B in the draft. But either way, I did not view Panda as a potential keeper for me.
So since Panda had no value to me from a keeper standpoint, that meant his only value to me would be through a trade. He was a chip, plain and simple. So I touched base with various owners throughout the league, gauging their interest in him, and determined that there were only 2 (Brian and Jimmy) who had any interest in trading for him. After some brief dialogue with both of them, it became clear that Dickerson was BY FAR the best value I would get.
Bottom line is this. Whether you like Dickerson, dislike Dickerson, or don't care one way or the other.... there is a reason why he is ranked pretty highly by every year-to-year and dynasty fantasy publication this side of the Jargon. It's either that Jimmy is right and all of the professional fantasy writers are wrong. Or that all of those writers somehow failed to notice the predictive regression stats that Jimmy pointed out. OR... It's because they did notice them, then processed them properly, and rightly concluded that this was still a player well worth pursuing.
THE MASAHIRO TANAKA GAMBLE
On this trade, I agree with Jimmy's assessment entirely. This is a riverboat gamble if ever there was one. I am as skeptical of Tanaka's decision to forego surgery as anyone. And honestly, I fully expect him to need TJ at some point. Simply put, this move scares the crap out of me. This is by far the least confident I have ever been about a trade since I entered this league.
So why do it? Simply put, because I live in the land of the giants. It's survival of the fittest in the NL. And to survive, you apparently have to build a ridiculous rotation. The Outs, Vandelay, and Steroid have aces coming out of their arses. Otto has Harvey, Teheran, and now Darvish. Jimmy has Price and a legion of young, potential aces coming through the pipeline.
Considering all that, I deemed a potential Cy Young guy with two years Minor League eligibility remaining to be worth taking a flier on, despite the injury concern. If he doesn't get hurt, adding Tanaka to my SP keepers of Scherzer, Lester, Ryu, and another soon-to-be-acquired above average SP should at least keep me competitive in the SP categories. If he gets hurt and needs TJ, well that would suck. But even then, this is still an investment pick. He's only 26 years old, and post TJ guys seem to be coming back better than ever. Worst case scenario, he gets hurt and needs TJ this year, I stash him until he recovers, and then he slots into my rotation when he's still only 28.
It was definitely hard to give up Upton. But I was dealing from a surplus. And frankly, that's why I acquired the surplus - to have the flexibility to make moves like this. With Hanley starting and Dickerson as depth, I should still have above average production in LF. And even without Upton, I think my offense on the whole should still be pretty potent. So it came down to whether dealing a good player from a surplus was worth dealing for a high-upside yet high-risk pitcher. And because my pitching looked to be lagging behind the rest of the division, and I had offensive depth overall and in LF, it seemed to be a worthwhile gamble. And when you add in a minors eligible reliever with elite peripherals who looks like a top-flight closer in the making (Giles), I decided that ultimately it was a risk worth taking.
Finally, the end! And don't worry, I will never do this — at least at this length — again.
Comments