Jump to content
NBC Sports EDGE Forums

Framber Valdez 2021 Outlook


Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, NoHablaIngles said:

Well, I had briefly looked at his spin rates after the crackdown and didn't see any reason for concern... that article prompted me to take a a look at Valdez's spin rates again:

In Valdez's last start before the crackdown, he had Bauer units of 24.07 on his sinker and 37.79 on his curve. In yesterday's start it was 23.76 on his sinker and 36.66 on his curve. That is not a statistically significant difference on the fastball; zero issue here especially considering the shape of the pitch. There is a minor dip in the curve but nothing alarming. It certainly doesn't provide any evidence he was using spider-tack or any of these elaborate sticky substances.

Again, I'd caution making any broad conclusions on the basis of a 13 inning sample. Valdez's main skill in quality contact suppression is still in tact, his ability to miss bats is still there, his issue has been issuing free passes (if you saw the home plate ump yesterday....). He has a 3.65 xFIP since the crackdown, again small sample size, but that is nothing to panic over.

If you read the article, it explains that - in addition to a lower spin rate - he’s also experienced a dip in velocity.  And his once near-elite sinker has become an eminently hittable pitch.  And all of this coincides with a massive drop-off in control, as well as a much higher hit rate allowed.

Is it proof positive that he was using? No.  Is it a fair assumption that has thus far held up?  Yes, it most certainly is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, BMcP said:

If you read the article, it explains that - in addition to a lower spin rate - he’s also experienced a dip in velocity.  And his once near-elite sinker has become an eminently hittable pitch.  And all of this coincides with a massive drop-off in control, as well as a much higher hit rate allowed.

Is it proof positive that he was using? No.  Is it a fair assumption that has thus far held up?  Yes, it most certainly is.

Velocity and spin rate have a very strong positive correlation, that's the point I was making with the Bauer units. You can (almost perfectly) attribute the fluctuation in spin to the fluctuation in velocity. It's not a spin issue. 

In the small sample size we're dealing with, I dont think it's helpful or persuasive to have these broad takeaways. Drop-off in control? Yeah, he's issued more walks... But consider that he (and many other elite pitchers) have had 16 inning samples where they've issued 13 walks in their careers... it doesn't really tell you much. 

His elite sinker has become an eminently hittable pitch? Consider his groundball rate is still miles better than anyone else in the MLB and his EV has been 90.8 and 87.5 respectively in his last two starts... and his babip is over .500!!! in those games. 

It's hard to draw that conclusion when looking at all the data.... again, in a 16 inning sample. Even when you ignore the sample size, the underlying metrics are pretty fantastic (aside from walk rate).

Edited by NoHablaIngles
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I mean as I said earlier, feel free to draw your own conclusions from the available data.  At least we seem to now both agree that both his spin rate and velocity have diminished since the crackdown.  I’ve made an assumption as to the cause that has yet to be disproven and is consistent with the data.  Unfortunately in fantasy, we don’t have the luxury of allowing a substantial sample size to materialize before making roster decisions.  It’s possible this is nothing but a coincidence - just like Cole might have coincidentally experienced a drop in his spin rates recently having nothing to do with sticky stuff.  For me, trusting that it is all purely coincidental and anomalous stretches the bounds of credulity - even ignoring the fact that Valdez had already been accused of cheating just this season before the crackdown.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't totally been following this thread, but to sum it up I think it went along the lines of, he's a total ace/top 15 pitcher and now people are overreacting to the past 2 starts and saying he's far worse. I think the answer was truthfully somewhere in between, I'd probably have him within my top 30 although I'm not huge on rankings.

The Astros are just such a favorable rotation situation this season. Still, things COULD get weird there; earlier they were plagued by constant injury, and yet despite a recent injury to Urquidy, a scare with Greinke, they could be rolling with a 6-man crew the rest of the way. Verlander still looms, but Framber seems the safest guy in the rotation after Greinke, and he's got more fantasy upside than Ol' Zacharias.

I'd remind his managers that he was a gift, almost free for many because of injury, so he's returning healthy value. Expecting his numbers to continue without regression wasn't ever going to happen, so try not to panic. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, BMcP said:

Yeah I mean as I said earlier, feel free to draw your own conclusions from the available data.  At least we seem to now both agree that both his spin rate and velocity have diminished since the crackdown.  I’ve made an assumption as to the cause that has yet to be disproven and is consistent with the data.  Unfortunately in fantasy, we don’t have the luxury of allowing a substantial sample size to materialize before making roster decisions.  It’s possible this is nothing but a coincidence - just like Cole might have coincidentally experienced a drop in his spin rates recently having nothing to do with sticky stuff.  For me, trusting that it is all purely coincidental and anomalous stretches the bounds of credulity - even ignoring the fact that Valdez had already been accused of cheating just this season before the crackdown.

It's pretty clear we disagree on almost everything said here: Spin, underlying data etc. I've given my two cents and I dont want to rehash the discussion since we're set in our positions and it's going nowhere. I do have a question about the last thing said, when has Valdez been accused of cheating before? Genuinely curious if I missed something.

Also side note, calling pitchers cheaters for using sticky stuff when it was never enforced before rubs me the wrong way but that is neither here nor there. 

Edited by NoHablaIngles
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I knew this guy was going to have problems when I was watching a Trevor Bauer sticky substance video and Framber Valdez was at the top of the leaderboard for pitches thrown in 2020 with 3k+ RPM. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Richard Kimble said:

I haven't totally been following this thread, but to sum it up I think it went along the lines of, he's a total ace/top 15 pitcher and now people are overreacting to the past 2 starts and saying he's far worse. I think the answer was truthfully somewhere in between, I'd probably have him within my top 30 although I'm not huge on rankings.

The Astros are just such a favorable rotation situation this season. Still, things COULD get weird there; earlier they were plagued by constant injury, and yet despite a recent injury to Urquidy, a scare with Greinke, they could be rolling with a 6-man crew the rest of the way. Verlander still looms, but Framber seems the safest guy in the rotation after Greinke, and he's got more fantasy upside than Ol' Zacharias.

I'd remind his managers that he was a gift, almost free for many because of injury, so he's returning healthy value. Expecting his numbers to continue without regression wasn't ever going to happen, so try not to panic. 

The problem with Framber is his lack of strike outs gives him a much smaller margin for error. If you believe he's still a low 3.00s ERA type guy then top 30 seems like a perfectly reasonable expectation. If you think he's more like a mid to high 3.00s ERA guy then I'd say he's more like a top 45 guy and probably a 5th SP in shallow leagues. Logic would say to shop him and while he still has a sub 3.00 ERA, but the question is who do you target? I honestly feel like I  don't have a good sense of who's good (and who isn't) anymore because of the whole Spidertack / sticky stuff crackdown. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, NoHablaIngles said:

It's pretty clear we disagree on almost everything said here: Spin, underlying data etc. I've given my two cents and I dont want to rehash the discussion since we're set in our positions and it's going nowhere. I do have a question about the last thing said, when has Valdez been accused of cheating before? Genuinely curious if I missed something.

Also side note, calling pitchers cheaters for using sticky stuff when it was never enforced before rubs me the wrong way but that is neither here nor there. 

https://fansided.com/2021/06/03/red-sox-fans-framber-valdez-illegal-substance/amp/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Richard Kimble said:

I haven't totally been following this thread, but to sum it up I think it went along the lines of, he's a total ace/top 15 pitcher and now people are overreacting to the past 2 starts and saying he's far worse. I think the answer was truthfully somewhere in between, I'd probably have him within my top 30 although I'm not huge on rankings.

The Astros are just such a favorable rotation situation this season. Still, things COULD get weird there; earlier they were plagued by constant injury, and yet despite a recent injury to Urquidy, a scare with Greinke, they could be rolling with a 6-man crew the rest of the way. Verlander still looms, but Framber seems the safest guy in the rotation after Greinke, and he's got more fantasy upside than Ol' Zacharias.

I'd remind his managers that he was a gift, almost free for many because of injury, so he's returning healthy value. Expecting his numbers to continue without regression wasn't ever going to happen, so try not to panic. 

 

This is where I've been at. 

I'm not going to say there isn't concerns with Valdez, this is a person who's only had a relatively small history of having ace-like status, and I would argue that was mostly in postseason. And even in 2020 he had blowups. There was a game where he gave up 8 ER! But I still think things could go either way, whether we're looking at 2018-2019 Valdez, or more like 2020/2020 postseason Valdez. But the reward is there if it leans more towards the latter. And he still has time to achieve that, if we were to assume he's still adjusting to a post sticky stuff era.

Edited by Bregatron
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's been pages and pages and pages of "Is he using the sticky stuff?"... "OMG!  We think he's using the sticky stuff"

Ultimate question:  Let's say you own Valdez - you're not dropping him, you'd be laughed at & someone would immediately pick him up.  There's literally zero better options on any WW in any league format/size etc.  Regardless of any concerns, there's zero reason to doubt he's not going to continue to be a highly productive fantasy asset ROS with zero options better on a WW.  

You could always try to peddle him to someone but you'd literally be selling at his lowest point.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, IlliniGuy76 said:

There's been pages and pages and pages of "Is he using the sticky stuff?"... "OMG!  We think he's using the sticky stuff"

Ultimate question:  Let's say you own Valdez - you're not dropping him, you'd be laughed at & someone would immediately pick him up.  There's literally zero better options on any WW in any league format/size etc.  Regardless of any concerns, there's zero reason to doubt he's not going to continue to be a highly productive fantasy asset ROS with zero options better on a WW.  

You could always try to peddle him to someone but you'd literally be selling at his lowest point.

i may be wrong, but i dont recall anyone suggesting to drop framber.  and when it was suggested that regression may be coming (prior to his last two starts) and to consider selling high, those making the suggestion were laughed out of the thread with exclamations of why would you ever sell a top 15 pitcher.  hind sight of course is 20/20, but at least we can all agree there are some reasons for concern here.  heres hoping he can get his control in check and return sp2/sp3 numbers ros.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, B&F said:

Maybe no substance has caused lack of control.

It seems like everyone in here has forgotten that was the entire reason for substances to exist in the first place. Yeah, it because a spin rate monster, but the entire idea behind substances to begin with was to improve grip. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, herschel said:

i may be wrong, but i dont recall anyone suggesting to drop framber.  and when it was suggested that regression may be coming (prior to his last two starts) and to consider selling high, those making the suggestion were laughed out of the thread with exclamations of why would you ever sell a top 15 pitcher.  hind sight of course is 20/20, but at least we can all agree there are some reasons for concern here.  heres hoping he can get his control in check and return sp2/sp3 numbers ros.

The thing about the RW forums is that no one in the site’s history has ever been a sell high candidate. Whenever someone has floated that idea in a player thread it’s always met with one of two responses- either “no way I’m selling this player, he’s a top x player” or “no one would ever give full value in return.” If you believe someone is a sell high, trust your gut, not owners that are overly optimistic in a player thread.

And for the record, not everyone laughed at your idea. I agreed with it and said that if I could trade in my leagues I would’ve been making some offers with him involved.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, meh2 said:

The thing about the RW forums is that no one in the site’s history has ever been a sell high candidate. Whenever someone has floated that idea in a player thread it’s always met with one of two responses- either “no way I’m selling this player, he’s a top x player” or “no one would ever give full value in return.” If you believe someone is a sell high, trust your gut, not owners that are overly optimistic in a player thread.

And for the record, not everyone laughed at your idea. I agreed with it and said that if I could trade in my leagues I would’ve been making some offers with him involved.

this is very true....appreciate the reminder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So as owners try to determine what to do with Valdez I think it might he helpful to do some player comps. For example, do you think Valdez will be better or worse than Fried from this point on? How about Hendricks? Just throwing some names out there to get the conversation started. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nobody sold high on Framber Valdez?  Someone sure did. I acquired him recently, before the last few starts. So  someone did. Sorry for destroying Framber by trading for him.

I'm still fine about him going forward. He doesn't have an elite k rate, but him going deeper into games than most pitchers helps, very much like it did for Greinke. I'm not convinced he's going to turn into a pumpkin because of the new substance rules.  The AL West isn't a scary division, especially when you don't have to face the Astros. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, herschel said:

i may be wrong, but i dont recall anyone suggesting to drop framber.  and when it was suggested that regression may be coming (prior to his last two starts) and to consider selling high, those making the suggestion were laughed out of the thread with exclamations of why would you ever sell a top 15 pitcher.  hind sight of course is 20/20, but at least we can all agree there are some reasons for concern here.  heres hoping he can get his control in check and return sp2/sp3 numbers ros.

Regression is completely different than wild overreaction to a few sub-par starts. 

How  he was pitching in late-May into June wasn't sustainable (he has a sub 2.10 ERA) - never was (regression).  Over-the-top panic to those few sub-par starts indeed is just that.. panic. 

Edited by IlliniGuy76
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But how is a deliberate and considered decision to sell high on a player due for regression “panic”?  If we were all correct to expect regression, wouldn’t it just make sense to begin exploring offers with his value at its peak?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, IlliniGuy76 said:

Regression is completely different than wild overreaction to a few sub-par starts. 

How  he was pitching in late-May into June wasn't sustainable (he has a sub 2.10 ERA) - never was (regression).  Over-the-top panic to those few sub-par starts indeed is just that.. panic. 

this was my quote from june 21.  hardly "over the top panic"...

 

Anyone concerned with regression ROS?  Found this on another site...Thinking about trying to sell high.

 

Valdez has less data due to missing the first part of the season, but his resurgent June isn’t likely representative of his true skill set. His K-B% is the same as Dylan Bundy, and he’s been treated to a .230 BABIP so far. Bats are warming up and his ridiculous 71% ground ball rate won’t be sustainable.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, BMcP said:

But how is a deliberate and considered decision to sell high on a player due for regression “panic”?  If we were all correct to expect regression, wouldn’t it just make sense to begin exploring offers with his value at its peak?

a)You're attempting to sell high on a player due to what you believe is a regression coming - if you're selling high on a player you'd want above "normal" return on said player due to the incredible early-May/June he had.

b) Panicking is selling a player to get him off of your roster; you'll take anything "reasonable" due to his previous 2-3 starts.

c)  Keeping him on your roster knowing that there will be some regression (as his late-May/June starts weren't sustainable - or at least more than likely not) and NOT panicking each and every time he has a questionable start as you know he'll mean out around a very good SP2 ROS/high-end SP3;  at least I hope that's the return.

Edited by IlliniGuy76
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One aspect people forget about the buy low/sell high thing is the player yiu are getting in return. Selling high just to sell high, what are you getting in return? You're buying something if you sold Framber. Did you buy high or low on that? Selling high just to buy high might defeat the purpose.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, brockpapersizer said:

One aspect people forget about the buy low/sell high thing is the player yiu are getting in return. Selling high just to sell high, what are you getting in return? You're buying something if you sold Framber. Did you buy high or low on that? Selling high just to buy high might defeat the purpose.

Did you sell high or low?  Purely out of curiosity?

Edited by BMcP
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, jmcampbe11 said:

So as owners try to determine what to do with Valdez I think it might he helpful to do some player comps. For example, do you think Valdez will be better or worse than Fried from this point on? How about Hendricks? Just throwing some names out there to get the conversation started. 

I’ll take Framber over both those guys pretty easily but then again I’m apparently the only one in the thread who isn’t insanely concerned over 2 non elite non calamitous starts 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, BMcP said:

Did you sell high or low?  Purely out of curiosity?

I acquired him.  I gave up a decent prospect to get him because I'm in win now mode. I guess it was a sell high for me, but if the prospect is a stud I could regret it. Those are the risks.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...