Rob

I honestly would be fine with Baez or Bryant as the #1. I'm leaning Baez today, but I go back and forth on it.

Coming from Bob Nightengale, that actually makes me feel better about our chances.

Yeah. I loved the polls. And we can always do a "where would you insert Tanaka into the list" poll like we did for somebody last time. (Paniagua?)

Play someone at third that can hit decently and play Valbuena at second. Done. And who is that? The bar for offense at 3B is lower than people think. If we could find even a Vitters-level bat that would play there as long as they were an average fielder.

I just keep reminding myself that at least the moves we've made have been good ones. That said, they're all pretty minor acquisitions. There isn't even a Shark trade to look at and say "this move will impact the team in 2016."

The timeframes for Soler and Almora are kinda tough to pin down with any real confidence. Soler appeared to be getting pushed pretty aggressively until the injury slowed him down. As far as Almora is concerned, I could see them being very aggressive if his approach warrants it.

Parks confirmed the order is Baez, Bryant, Almora, Soler, Edwards, Alcantara, and Johnson.

Apparently we claimed Brett Marshall off waivers from the Yankees, and lost Liam Hendricks on waivers to the Orioles. http://i.imgur.com/voP7zKK.png

I still think Justin Grimm can factor into that bullpen. I like him better as a starter, but to be honest there's enough of these guys that I forgot all about him.

There are quite a few talented arms who could spend time in the bullpen this year and emerge as legitimate late innings guys (i.e. Not James Russell) Veras Fujikawa Strop Parker Vizcaino Cabrera Arrieta Villanueva Rondon Wright* Rosscup* Not bad.

It's an alright move. "Proven closer" on a cheap one year deal with an option. Reminds me of the Maholm signing. As for his peripherals, I'm not seeing much to explain why his strikeout and walk rates fell significantly last year. I wouldn't be surprised if they both bounce back up a bit.

Never implemented? Don't you remember Kevin Mitchell at SS?

For his career, Roberts has hit .266/.341/.444 versus lefties and just .233/.310/.362 versus righties. That's not a huge sample size for either so both should be pretty heavily regressed, but he definitely looks like at least like a good platoon option for 3B (especially since UZR likes him). And he could be a fit at 2B if Barney is injured, traded, or just terrible. I have no idea what to make of Kalish's numbers due to all the injuries, but the old scouting reports suggest he could be a starting caliber player if he's actually healthy. Wada is probably a nice upgrade over Rusin as the 6th starter. As for Baker, somebody needs to play C in Iowa.

Slick little move.

We could just look at a player's batting average and guess what that player will hit the next year. But instead we look at BABIP, park factors, GB%, LD%, FB%, IFFB%, HR/FB, baserunning and aging curves. There's even some work done trying to adjust for players against whom other teams will employ severe defensive shifts. The minor little peripherals can sometimes signal when there's a fundamental disconnect between what a player showed in a given year and what they can be expected to do going forward. Ok, HR/FB tells you everything that average distance a ball flies tells you and more. Information is important and looking at things in a different way can be usefull, but sometimes it's informational minutiae. Everything people are looking at functions at the very least of indicators of confidence in other data. If a pitcher's SwStr% matches up with their projected strikeout rate, I feel better about that being their real skill level. If a batter's average distance on flyballs matches up with their HR/FB, then we can feel pretty good the wind didn't just take a couple lucky ones into the basket. But when there is a disconnect in the data, it is not informational minutiae at all. Suddenly, that data becomes very relevant for predicting future performances. If you don't care enough to look into all of this stuff that's fine. But acting like we're just being pedantic doesn't change the underlying reality that these numbers can and do matter.

We could just look at a player's batting average and guess what that player will hit the next year. But instead we look at BABIP, park factors, GB%, LD%, FB%, IFFB%, HR/FB, baserunning and aging curves. There's even some work done trying to adjust for players against whom other teams will employ severe defensive shifts. The minor little peripherals can sometimes signal when there's a fundamental disconnect between what a player showed in a given year and what they can be expected to do going forward. Edit: In this case, Lake had the 36th worst strikeout rate in the majors amongst players with at least 250 PA last season. If that's all you see, it's not the kiss of death (but it doesn't bode well). But when you look closer, his contact percentage was 3rd worst (between Ryan Howard, Chris Carter, Pedro Alvarez, and Carlos Pena). And his swinging strike percentage was 6th worst. It looks like Lake will have to make real progress at the plate just to maintain his current strikeout rate. Improvement would require a pretty epic breakout.

The difference between Lake and Starling Marte this year is basically 20 feet of batted ball distance and a contact advantage in Marte's favor. Of course, Lake is two years younger and despite scouts not caring for the swing their reports have been unanimous in his power potential, so the a 20 foot current gap is not an insurmountable number. Don't get me wrong, I don't love Lake as a difference maker (or Marte for that matter). But he's got plenty going for him -- some of the best raw tools in the game, age relative to league, etc... If he can take a step forward with his contact he can be great. Failing at that, if he can just string together a couple lucky BABIP years we can trade him to Kevin Towers for half his farm system. 20 feet is a HUGE number. I can't stress how big of a difference 20 feet is. Prince Fielder's distance dropped from 311 to 291 in the last 4 years and saw his HR total almost drop down by 20. Marte and Lake don't have much in common, other than poor plate discipline. The 9% contact difference is huge too. They aren't marginal differences. Hopefully we catch KT on one of his panic attack days. Holy [expletive], I have no idea how I was able to type up something that legible as drunk as I was. And you righteously eviscerated the argument. Bravo. I like you already. I will say I'm a bit hesitant to put too much stock in Lake's batted ball distance at this point, but it certainly does stabilize a lot faster than I would have anticipated. (Relevant Link) The tools really drew me in when he was about 17, but he's 24 now and I guess it's time to start evaluating him as an OF instead of a potential 3B option. With the offensive bar being set where it is, he's probably not much more than a 2 WAR guy in a good year (albeit one that can really look spectacular when things are going well). Congratulations, I think you finally broke me of my man-crush.

I'd like them to add a CF also. I'm sorta surprised they're looking for a RH partner for Rizzo, honestly. In a lost season, I sorta assumed they'd let him run with the 1B job and try to make adjustments so he doesn't end up a platoon guy.

The difference between Lake and Starling Marte this year is basically 20 feet of batted ball distance and a contact advantage in Marte's favor. Of course, Lake is two years younger and despite scouts not caring for the swing their reports have been unanimous in his power potential, so the a 20 foot current gap is not an insurmountable number. Don't get me wrong, I don't love Lake as a difference maker (or Marte for that matter). But he's got plenty going for him -- some of the best raw tools in the game, age relative to league, etc... If he can take a step forward with his contact he can be great. Failing at that, if he can just string together a couple lucky BABIP years we can trade him to Kevin Towers for half his farm system.

I would have liked to hold onto Mateo (and maybe Morris), but we didn't really lose anything today worth getting upset over. Simply not losing Hatley and Ha is enough to keep me happy.

Honestly, there aren't many players in baseball right now with a wider potential range of outcomes for 2014. If you jumped out of a time machine and told me he was the worst player in the majors I wouldn't be surprised. I also wouldn't be surprised if he was a 5 WAR player. The good news is we are in an ideal position to find out if there's anything there.

This isn't a Jack Morris situation. Glavine threw 1664 more innings with a 3.79 ERA over those innings. Halladay was better at his peak, but Glavine had the longevity. There's no right or wrong answer between the two.

I actually wouldn't mind seeing the Cubs acquire Danks. The White Sox would probably eat a little contract and not require much in return.

http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view/14276/i-don-t-care-o.gif

I'm not sure id give Young a league minimum, no incentives deal. Hell, I might not even extend him a minor league deal. NR ST invitee, maybe.