Wait - why do you hope I'm right? We should all hope I'm wrong, because it would mean the Cards would be willing to give up more for Tejada that way. cardpire - I agree with the last part. I think we'd get a decent prospect or two, and if it's anyone who could remotely contribute to the team in the next few years, I'd do the deal. But I don't think we'll get anyting quite at the level of Dotel/Buck or Guillen/Garcia.
Yep, sounds right. And I'll echo that if it's a salary dump and nothing else...no thanks. Oh and no chance at Rasmus, holy crap. They won't deal him in the first place without getting back a young stud, much less to a division rival!
i accidentally responded to your post...i meant to respond to cardpire's where he said we'd get a good prospect.
unless the cardinals (and every other MLB team) are run by a group of ding-bats, i'm sure they're very much aware that tejada will probably spend the rest of the year sliding BACK to his norm; which means, from this point forward, he'll likely hit .230-ish with an OPS of .700-ish. he's WAY over his head. combine that with his salary and age, and i doubt the prospect will be highly-thought of; which doesn't mean he's worthless...
5 games out of first place a third of the way into the season and it is time to have a fire sale? Whatever. Time for me to go back to sleep.
Most people make this mistake, but this isn't how regression to the mean works. A player overperforming for a period doesn't suggest that he will underperform for a period to balance it out. It actually suggests that however he's performed already, he's expected to perform at his normal mean going forward, so over time, his overall performance will be expected to regress back to the mean.
Are you sure it's not somewhere between those two? Baseball is a game of streaks. Even Pujols has upswings and downswings. Perhaps "hit .230 with a .600 OPS for the rest of the year" is a bit much, but isn't it fair to assume Tejada has arrived at his career numbers via a series of stretches both above and below his mean? I certainly wouldn't be surprised, especially at his advanced age, to see him play under his career mean for a stretch or three the rest of the way out.
Players will certainly play above or below their average for stretches, and it's likely Tejada will hit a lull at some point going forward - but it's just as likely he'll hit another hot stretch. Basically, the idea of regressing to the mean suggests that what he's done so far is irrelevant going forward. The way regressing to the mean works is similar to flipping a coin. Let's say you flip a coin 5 times and you get all heads. That doesn't suggest that going forward, you're likely to get more tails to balance it out. It just means that despite the 5 heads, you're still likely to do the average (50/50 heads or tails) on the next flip. But as the sample size gets larger, those initial 5 heads become less relevant so you'll end up regressing back closer to 50/50 overall. For example, after the 5 flips, you're at 5 H / 0 T (100% Heads). After 15 flips, you're likely be closer to 10 H / 5 T (66% Heads). After 25 flips, you're likely to be at 15 H / 10 T (60% Heads), etc. You'll regress to the mean - but by performing at your average rather than subpar to balance out the hot streak.
I understand that, Major (but fantastic explanation!). But I think that premise underplays other factors, most importantly age. Baseball is far more "human" than flipping coins and other pure statistical analysis.
Oh certainly - I'm not suggesting Tejada won't suck the rest of the way because he's old or whatever. But whatever you think he should be as a player (whether 0.700 OPS or 0.800 OPS or 0.900 OPS) is what you'd expect him to perform going forward. The fact that he had a hot streak early doesn't suggest he would or should have a similar cold streak to balance it out - that's all I'm saying.
cool; you're right. by season's end, he'll likely be at or near his average production - meaning from this point forward, he's likely going to play below average as a means of evening his numbers out.
if this did happen, is the season officially over? hard to say, but given we're only 5 back, I guess Drayton is trying to minimize financial loses...
I don't think it would be for financial reasons. The reason to trade Tejada would be an infusion of young talent for the organization. I don't see Drayton telling Wade to trade Tejada to shed payroll, I think its more likely the Stros trade him, pick up some of the remaining salary for the season, and in return pick up a good prospect in return.
Trade him for prospects, or a young SS who obviously won't hit as well but is an improvement in defense and plate discipline.
right, right - it's two different ideas, and i misued the term. i think.... if he's going to finish the season .280/.800 ish, he has to play well below his current level of production to balance that out. that's a pretty simple, basic equation. "regression to mean," however, means that nothing that's happened prior - good or bad - should change the fact that, overall, tejada is a .280/.800 ish hitter. i think.
If he is a superstitious player (and most are) and he believes that any hot streak will eventually have to be countered with an equally bad cold streak, then in a way how he is performing now could play into the probability that he will hit that lull in his batting, if the mental aspect is what drives him into the valley from the peak. I don't really believe that will be the case, but there could potentially be some connection there. Anyway, I am far from a statistician. I had to take statistics and probability in college and I STILL don't know how I got through that class because I learned nothing and understood even less.
