toonsterwu

Not sure why I'm thinking about this right now, probably having work to do on a Friday night leads to the mind drifting, but in some ways, this is a critical draft for two reasons. First, while they need as many impacts arms as they can get, it will be crucial to restock the positional asset depth in the system this year. By the time these draft picks are ready, the organization will likely be making critical decisions on which young MLB players will or won't get extensions, and while I can talk about how I am intrigued with the system this winter, there aren't that many guys that you really want as long term pieces. The second aspect is more a broader perspective issue, but the Reds/Pirates/Brewers all have fairly solid to good systems, and the Cards, while I don't like their system all that much, a lot of folks seem to like it more than enough (and I'll acknowledge they have depth and the potential for some of those guys to "pop"). It's absolutely fantastic where this system is considering the entire dynamics of the last couple seasons, but to sustain things, we'll need to restock the shelves. With the way the picks are, I am mildly curious if they try to load up for one or two big gets (seems a bit unlikely, but if they like the depth of the system ... ). ____ As a draft sidenote, I saw BA's top 100 college list by Teddy Cahill. Being a UVA fan, I was pleasantly surprised by Ernie Clement's placement. He did have a strong summer, IIRC, but I thought he'd be lower. If he can handle short well enough (and he has the tools to), I feel like he could be a nice sleeper to make a move this season. I think there might be even be a little pop, albeit not enough to jump way up the board. (as another UVA aside, I think Tommy Doyle is way too high unless he has a superb season). Oh, since UK was talking about him, a bit surprised Skoug is so low on a college list. I thought the bat would push him up a bit this year.

Doesn't feel like a comp that would need to be on the down low, though. I keep thinking that the guys Manuel knows and references are probably at the top, so along with manny, my other thought, thinking solely on bat, is a bit strange, but perhaps nomar, if they buy eloy learning and getting better on discipline with time.

I was, at first, mildly confused/intrigued with Manuel's comments about so much pitching talent in the lower levels that it'll be hard to find opportunities (particularly since he was so lukewarm on several guys), but to an extent, I sort of ... agree. Now ... I don't think we're that deep in the low levels in terms of high quality talent that the organization should be that enthused just yet, but there should be healthy competition starting from A+ on down for spots, particularly if Hatch makes the jump to MB. I'll be curious what their decision is in regards to where de la Cruz starts the year. There's some older college arms that were at South Bend last year that really don't need to go back there, but ... it doesn't seem like a lock that they will get rotation spots in Myrtle Beach. ____________ I certainly get the ... concerns ... about the system, but as it pertains to rankings, there's a lot of fluff/mediocrity on the back end of top 10 lists, particularly on the ones BA has put out so far. Again, that may be a testament more to the trend of systems loading up and teams going for it, leading to an imbalance in system strengths in the minors, but I really don't have huge issues with Albertos (it's basically your classic upside nod ... sure you'd like there to be more than 4 innings of work to judge on from this past year, but I recall rankings where quality arms coming off injuries still stayed in Top 10 lists), Wilson (fair to question if it's hot/cold, but I think they are viewing it from the prism of youth and upside of Wilson and giving the benefit of the doubt, which I don't have a problem with). I really don't have an issue with Zagunis. It's your typical upper level, floor, ready to help nod vs. ceiling, but it's not like Zagunis' doesn't have a shot to be a MLB regular. Perhaps not a first division regular, but there's enough to work with there. To be quite honest, I would question his bat speed as a bigger issue in regards to his potential to be a MLB regular than defensive consistency (I believe that's what Manuel questioned).

Wonder who the down low eloy comp is (unless I'm misreading it and Giancarlo is the dl comp ... Doesn't seem to read that way, though). My guess due to high hit tool. . Manny.

Manuel suggests the system has moved up a bit from their ranking last year. Of course, rankings don't necessarily reflect likelihood of success as risk is obviously a factor. Still, I stand by what I said a month or so ago - this looks like a borderline top 10, Likely top 15 system. Perhaps that's as much a statement about the minors in general, due to the tendency now for teams to rip apart (and thus load up their systems). Still, there's a solid top group, good depth. You, and even I, can have doubts on Candelario, but the broad profile (age, tools, some improvement, some production) lends to some positivity. To say zagunis is szczur .., I get it, but I think zagunis has a far better shot to be a solid second division regular than szczur. He'll never have hr pop, but zagunis should hit some doubles. Wilson and albertos are upside nods, which happens in all rankings. Wilson, at their very least, did show improvement. I have no problem with those 2 there ... Ejm would've surprised me a bit compared to those 2.

When I see that deal for Inciarte, the first thought that runs through my mind is about Mallex Smith. I get what Coppolella and Hart are trying to do - buying time basically, without continuing to be that awful, while forcing some of the kids into competition to see if they can step up. Still, one would think that Mallex Smith in CF and Ender Inciarte in a corner role would give them a better grasp on their future, rather than pushing Smith down to AAA. Yet, they seem committed to Nick Markakis and Matt Kemp in the corners to open the year. _____ Not sure why I'm pondering it on Christmas morning, but I was thinking about teams that might "White Sox" it, or at the very least, do a sale if things go sour, and I come up with the following teams: (no order) 1. Baltimore - They feel like they are in it, but if they aren't ... this is a team with a very poor system. Their window will only exist while their positional players are in their prime (I mean, even if we account for Buck Showalter magic with bullpen management, that's not enough). Slowly, a lot of key guys are exiting their prime, with only Machado and Schoop as young guys to look forward to. It would seem logical, if they fall out of it early, to consider some moves, even with a guy as young as Kevin Gausman, if they can get an arm and a leg. Flip side, on Gausman, is that, unless I'm mistaken, next winter is his first arb year. That said, biggest thing is Machado and what it'll do to keep him, so I'm not sure they'd ever really tear down until they get a clear sign that Machado is definitely gone. 2. Toronto - System has thinned out in recent years from moves to compete. If Donaldson/Tulowitzki slip, that lineup suddenly looks very mediocre. The flip side is, their two intriguing young pieces in Sanchez and Stroman have a lot of cost-controlled years left, and they might view them as core pieces to build for the next run and ship Donaldson/Tulowitzki out to replenish the system. 3. Detroit - The obvious candidate with that aging core and a still sparse system. Still ... if Mike Illitch doesn't allow a tear down, they can't tear down. Beyond that, their two intriguing young guys in Fulmer/Norris are so young they could be a part of the next solution. 4. Kansas City - Here's the team that seems the most likely candidate to tear down if things get off to a slow start and last, due to the impending changes in the construction of the team. Danny Duffy would likely bring back a solid return. 5. Miami - I wonder if a bad start might lead to selling. Of course, I don't know who buys Wei Yin Chen in that scenario, the guy they'd probably love to move with the backloaded deal. Some of those arms, like Conley, are so far away that they could be a part of the rebuild. Money committed to Giancarlo and the young hitting core might make a tear down hard, though, and they could be inclined to simply move pen arms to build/rebuild their system. I wonder about Seattle, but I'm not sure they can or would. Those are the five that seem most likely to follow some sort of tear down path if they get off to an extended bad start, and yet, all those have scenarios that might prevent them from doing so.

I questioned when Luhnow left for the Astros if he wasn't the real brains behind the operation. It seems their eye for talent has diminished significantly since he left, with really only the high draft picks and Diaz to show as products of their system. They haven't had one of those middle round guys explode to have a major impact in quite a while, and they're not even getting many of those guys to fill supporting roles cheaply as they had in the past. I was reading Derrick Goold's chat for the Cardinals system on BA the other day, and I was surprised at how positive he felt the system was. I think he said he felt it was a top 10 system. He did note a gap in the system and that there really aren't many top shelf guys yet. He noted Paul DeJong in there, and I'm still not sure DeJong is anything more intriguing than Christian Villanueva (different types of guys, just noting I'm not sure I'm convinced DeJong is a starter at the next level). He had a blurb in there about trading for a potential third baseman if he's put on the market ... which seemed to hint at Manny Machado. Unless Dan Duquette gets ... silly ... I'm not sure how, as of now, the heck they have the chips to make said trade without other teams swooping in and topping it. Even a headlining package involving, say, Alex Reyes, would probably only be the start. Took a quick look over the Cardinals list today, and I'm just not that enamored with their guys. Maybe there's some bias here. I'm certain there are guys that I like in the Cubs system (not including cases like PJ Higgins, who just piques me interest) on skill/ability that people would look at and say, eh. Still ... I see a lot of power arms, but a lot of it seems unrefined/raw. I'm not particularly enamored with Harrison Bader, who I'm not sure is a starting OF. They have some CF depth, but don't love Bader, and I'm still not sure how excited one should be about Magneuris Sierra. Dunno ... I guess there's some pieces to dream on, but I'm just not sure there's a ton of ceiling in that system to be really superbly excited about, guys that seem unique/special despite being far away. That Arozarena kid seems like he's the hot thing, so maybe him. There is pitching depth, no doubt about it, but they need some of those top shelf guys to really step up to be interesting. Dunno, will be curious to see how it unfolds.

The high cost of good, young pitching (either in money or prospects) is certainly a cause for concern for the Cubs in the near future (and longer if they continue to struggle to produce high-end arms in-house), but the Eaton trade gives me hope. I've soured a bit on Giolito (I was really high on him before), but he's still very good. If Eaton can bring back that haul, there's hope the Cubs "surplus" of very good, young, inexpensive major league hitting can help with their young talent on the mound. They'd need to find the right team with the right prospects and the right motivation (not always readily available), but Hahn has shown it's possible. Sure, it's possible, but I really would note that most teams with young guys in their prime signed to team-friendly deals tend not to deal them even if the team is rebuilding, as they tend to view them as possible pieces for their next core. The White Sox were a, well, not necessarily unique, but interesting case. They entered 2016 with hope, after all. Their struggles in 2016 coupled with a poor system is what pushed them down this path. Furthermore, Adam Eaton was probably at just the right age to make the move - young enough for another team to view as a core piece for the next 3-4 years, but old enough that if you start the rebuild push, as the White Sox did with moving Sale, Eaton likely isn't going to be a key piece by the time they are ready. Is it possible that with the shifting philosophies on team-building that we might see a growth the in the chances that teams will make said big trades(that is, the steady increase of teams willing to take a step backwards to go forwards, for lack of a better way of saying it)? Perhaps. I would also note that the Nationals seemed most troubled with the loss of Lopez, and if their assessment of their guys end up being correct ... and they made a dramatic shift on Giolito, which seemed based on a couple factors, ranging from stuff to work ethic ... this trade may be viewed differently down the line.

Only way Wei-Yin Chen opts out is if he has a monster year. The bulk of the contract was backloaded, so I just don't see him bailing out after a mediocre (or bad) first year with the Marlins. ____ With the money Ross wants, I'd be surprised if he was amenable to a 2nd year option, unless it's a player option, giving him the leverage. Dunno, if his asking price is around 10 mil (I thought I read that somewhere) ... doesn't seem likely he'll take a team option on Year 2, unless it's a really big team option. Maybe I'm reading it wrong. Seems like he's hoping for a one year rebound and re-establish his market. ____ As for trading Candelario, it's a shame the Angels don't have anyone that really works, as Jeimer could definitely fit there. With all their contracts and impending rising costs, one would think the Royals might be a fit for Jeimer, although not sure if there's any return that I particularly love that seems realistic.

Pavin has such a smooth stroke, and there should be good power. I tend to think that he could play the OF just fine, and isn't limited to first, but he's a solid defensive first baseman. In any other year, I'd think there's an outside chance at Pavin getting to the late first, due to position, but the college bat class seems so weak ... I saw one early mock had him early-mid first, which I think is unlikely, but hey ... Angels drafted Matt Thaiss for first base (granted, every draft is unique to itself), and Pavin is a superior hitter, IMO (although Thaiss' power was ahead of Smith's, and I think Smith will eventually develop that pop). I really can't think of many quality college bats this year. Guys will emerge, but it's such a weak crop. I think I like Skoug better than Thaiss, but I mainly want to see a team spend at least a year seeing if they will stick behind the plate. I hated the idea of shifting Thaiss right away without seeing if he could hack it behind the plate. I actually thought Thaiss had a decent chance to not be terrible behind the plate, and maybe below average, which would've been fine if the bat held.

The A's are tough to figure out. My hunch is that a Happ led package works ... but ... I don't know how much I like Graveman. Seems like we could've spent some chump change on FA (say Jhoulys Chacin market) and gotten close to Graveman production (unless he turned a really stellar, leap forward year). Just feels like an 4/5 strike throwing innings eater. That said, maybe he's the type of guy that works because, well, he's cheap. If so, I would think that the A's rotation depth might lead them to desire some ceiling, and Happ would certainly be a good ceiling return for an end of the rotation-ish arm and a pen arm coming off injury. I'd venture a guess some side pieces would have to be tossed in, perhaps even on both sides, but yeah, it sounds like something the A's might consider.

I'm reading through these comments, and unless I'm missing something, I'm ... confused at why people are upset from a baseball perspective. He was asked about his usage, said he thought he was over-used and pointed to Game 6 and specifically the 9th inning (although there was a comment in there about how he didn't think he needed to be in and that Game 7 was critical at that point). He noted he was tired for Game 7. He also noted that his opinion is that baseball players shouldn't complain at the time, and that his job is to follow the manager's decisions. Again, I don't see what the big deal is. I'd be more curious if there's a different connotation to his words in his native language and maybe it means/sounds far less significant than what the translator made it sound (and I don't even think the translator made it sound all that bad). After years of listening to Orioles translators botch through Wei-Yin Chen interviews (even when Chen could speak English just fine) ... I don't know. This doesn't seem all that egregious from a baseball perspective. I'm not even sure the translated version really blasts Maddon all that much - he said his job is to not complain and come in and pitch at the moment, and his major critique, if any, is Game 6. Again, leaving aside the personal stuff with Aroldis, I just don't see any reason to get too upset about these translated comments unless there's more somewhere that I'm missing. The only thing that piques me curiosity is actually whether or not he told Maddon/Bosio that he was tired for Game 7, but at the end of the day, that doesn't matter since, well, the Cubs won.

From a rough value perspectve, obviously subjective, I'd say it is relatively even. I might even argue that the Cubs end holds more value (I still think Plutko is one of those "AAA train" guys that will end up going up and down a bit, and may find a good year here or there, whereas I think Zagunis has a better chance to hold a consistent MLB career, and I think Eloy holds a higher ceiling than Triston). As you note, it would probably never happen (I don't see the Cubs dealing Eloy for prospects when the window is here and now - if they make a move with Eloy, I expect it to be a big move to supplement the MLB roster ... but I also don't see the Indians really willing to spin a high ceiling arm like Triston for a high ceiling bat like Eloy when they have positional reinforcements (albeit, not at the same ceiling level) relatively close and may have some rotation needs). It's a fun idea, though.

I think the Orioles screwed the pooch on this offseason by acting too slowly (had they shopped Brach or Britton hard early, they probably could've netted a nice haul that could've allowed them to stay away from Trumbo and or fill other needs ... I had entertained the idea of some sort of Soler/Brach swap in mind earlier in the offseason as a possibility). Had they shopped Brach hard at all this winter ... I mean, they are coming in now after teams have started settling their setup guys (Marlins come to mind). Just seems too late. Still, with Rosenthal, who is still fairly well connected in that area, I think, reporting that the Orioles are willing to swap Brach, it does cross my mind what it might take. Granted, after the Uehara signing, doesn't seem like we'd do anything big in that regards, and we already have a loose parameter of what the Orioles want at least (Braves and Mallex Smith was rumored). Brach's benefited from Showalter's mostly exemplary bullpen management, but he's still a good late inning arm that, off the top, is cost-controlled and could act as a bridge to the next closer (if it's say Carl Edwards Jr.) or be the next closer for a year after Wade Davis. Unlikely, but I am mildly curious. Obviously, I am not suggesting trading too much or anything of the sort, but building a deep pen may be our answer to some of the rotation concerns, and if it doesn't take any key piece, it could be a thought. On paper, we don't really fit with their needs, though.

I agree with Tom on a couple points - I'm not sure Maikel Franco would absolutely dissuade them from adding a third baseman (although ... it might lead them to add one lower level wise if they preferred the ceiling), and I think Nick Pivetta for Jeimer is probably fair. That said, and I'm guilty of this too, but for all the times we hear legitimate (and that is, not fan discussion) rumors on prospect for prospect trades, the majority of it never happens, at least, not with really intriguing pieces. In the Phillies case, the depth of average to solid arms, guys with the mid-rotation ceilings might convince them otherwise, but teams have a tendency to rationalize things away or prefer the guys they know (hence why I still thin the worst move this regime made (which is saying something as this was thoroughly insignificant (although as with all scouting things, luck will run out at some point, so we should be happy for now)... was dumping Flaherty and Lemahieu that winter when they needed upper level positional options, then signing Jeff Bianchi (only to cut him later, IIRC). That said, they lucked into Adrian Cardenas and Luis Valbuena being free in the spring, which effectively replaced that depth). I tend to think while this is fun to contemplate (that is prying away solid young arm talent, MLB players or prospects, with our system assets), the likelihood is still higher that the competition for our 5th job comes through someone being cut/waived (Clay Buchholz, and heck, even Matt Garza comes to mind), or a team with depth trading someone (Brewers). The darkhorse may be the Rays, but even with a guy like Smyly, I'm not sure how well we match up.

Let's slice this down as well ... a) Which Ivan Nova? I'm not particularly in love with Matt Wisler, personally ... but let's not forget that Ivan Nova was an awful pitcher in 2015. Now, is there an explanation for that? Perhaps, but production is production, and while he wasn't awful at the start of 2016, he wasn't the pitcher he was with when he joined the Pirates. In fact, he has NEVER shown that level of command and home run prevention prior to the 2nd half of 2016 and joining the Pirates. Did he figure something out? Perhaps. b) I think to say WIsler has little trade value is harsh. Aaron Blair probably has little trade value right now. He was never viewed as highly as Matt Wisler (there were some folks that plopped down number 2 type starter potential for Wisler while he was coming up ... personally, always wondered if he was better off in the pen). Wisler's main pitches aren't bad. A fastball that can peak in the mid-90's, and a slider that probably grades above average. Problem is, IIRC, fastball is a bit flat, and he lacks a third pitch to go to. He's probably their 6th starter right now (I'm guessing Foltyniewicz is the favorite for the 5th job, but Wisler/Blair are likely to both be in the mix). We shouldn't forget that the bulk of the rest of the Braves top arms aren't ready for AAA yet (really don't see that many people that are going to tear through the minors, and even if they are ready to tear through and somehow force Wisler out of a rotation spot at AAA, if Wisler is at AAA ... I doubt the Braves are going to rush everyone that fast). So, let's leave aside Wisler's value himself and what I personally think he is. If you are the Braves, are you rushing to throw away your own depth unless it's for high quality? Here's a, as you note, durable starter who had some pedigree. It's not like his stuff has backed up - fastball velo is there, slider still shows above average, if I'm not mistaken. He's young enough that you hope he can pick up/improve some sort of 2-seamer, changeup, splitter type pitch to help out. Let's go beyond that for a moment - Candelario. Are we going to argue that Candelario is definitively better than most of the 3rd base options in the Braves system to justify this move? I like Candelario better than Rio Ruiz, but not by a ton. Travis Demeritte might be better off at 3rd, and Austin Riley is talented enough that he could push for AA by the end of 2017. ____ Anyhow, all this belies the fact that I would probably do Wisler for Candelario despite not liking it too much. I'm just wary of putting too much in, and I think the Braves would want more, perhaps even what davell notes, a Zagunis or someone. Even then, color me as not completely convinced the Braves would move Wisler for Happ when most of their prime young arms are far away. I don't buy that this depth/options available arm is going to be the main challenger to Mike Montgomery for the 5th job (I'm going to be surprised if there isn't a bigger move ... doesn't mean someone else couldn't sneak up and win the job), and I'm wary of throwing too many potential trade chips in early, before the season starts.

I don't think he could net Wisler. With their need for bats and their abundance of arms, I could see Candelario and Zagunis getting it done. Happ alone would do it(if not, then wow)and net us a secondary low level guy you could dream on. I do think Candelario would net Blair on his own. So, trying to slice this two ways in this post - From the Cubs perspective - At a certain point, trading an intriguing, young third base prospect (and while I haven't taken a peek at the rest of the minors recently, I highly doubt third base has suddenly jumped from empty to loaded) for a MLB fastball/slider young arm is intriguing. Still, Wisler is a guy who, while he had some intrigue coming up, hasn't exactly performed well enough to view as anything more than back of the rotation potential with a slim chance to be a mid-rotation arm. He simply hasn't been that good, and you can't live on prospect hype when you are past 250 MLB innings. Candelario's the type where if he gets off to a hot start, you could see him as a critical piece in a bigger deal than a guy with end of the rotation looks. Would I do Candelario for Wisler? Probably, but that's speaking in a world where I don't know what the other options are. I'm not so sure I'd do Candelario and Zagunis. I know the excitement on the system is decidedly down right now (although I like it), but the fact that we have some upper level positional asset depth is something that can't be taken for granted. From the Braves perspective - This is a thin pitching ... world, with quality arms signed down early. Wisler's young, and still developing, with 4 years of control left. He's shown himself in the majors as a capable arm, but needs some fine-tuning (namely, looks like he needs some sort of changeup/splitter of sorts to keep hitters a bit more honest). Am I going to deal him straight up for Ian Happ, a good, but not elite (and it's debatable if he's "great") prospect, someone we need to see more upper level minor league sample from to get a clearer picture? The top arm left on the market is arguably Ivan Nova, and a case can be made that Matt Wisler might be better, not only in the long term, but maybe in the short term. It's possible, I wouldn't rule it out, but I'm not necessarily convinced the Braves would do it. They traded away excess arms in Whalen and Povse to take a gamble on some power. They've got enough non-MLB arms that could probably net them intriguing enough power prospects to work with. Wisler isn't Tyrell Jenkins - Wisler's shown he can pitch as a starter in the majors, whereas Jenkins really hasn't been all that intriguing since ... 2011? In my mind, I run into a problem giving up more than Candelario and a quality 2nd piece for him. The team is likely to develop some question marks during the season, and I don't want to thin it out too early. To be quite honest, I don't really view the Braves as all that great of a match. They have high ceiling arms or cost-controlled young MLB starters, and are likely to demand a premium on them because they can use some depth to get some pieces here and there. I mean, they were supposedly told they could get Brad Brach for Mallex Smith as a centerpiece and passed. I really might've considered that deal from their perspective. Yes, Smith is an OF, but I think the guys they value, they place a premium on. Tom is right in that a lot of the names being discussed are likely pen arms in disguise (or they haven't failed enough yet to be shifted there), but really, from a depth perspective, that's all they need. I'd be surprised if their competition for the 5th job is only some tertiary piece, though. I tend to think they'll explore a bigger move, either a Tyson Ross, a Boston or Arizona "excess guy", or someone else. *not the right thread but not going to dig for a separate thread - Boston is going to be so lefty-heavy (Sale/Price/Pomeranz/Rodriguez). While the betting money is still probably Buchholz getting moved, if they move someone, I really wonder if they get the right deal for Pomeranz, if they might consider it. They could probably get a huge return on Pomeranz, but that would leave the two spots to Eduardo Rodriguez/Clay Buchholz/Steven Wright, and I'm not sure they would be that enthused. Still, it's a thought running in my mind. They could potentially replenish the system a bit as well, and perhaps get another competitor for the end of the rotation (heck ... some sort of trade with the Braves would make some sense). To be clear, I don't think we'd match up in a Pomeranz deal. Buchholz makes the most sense for the Red Sox to move on from (and for us to investigate) because that would reduce their payroll by a big chunk.

Here's the thing ... as intriguing as Candelario is, and I like him enough (although the uneven offensive production still bothers, since he's in the upper levels), you don't deal him unless it's for a quality young arm. The problem is, I'm not sure the industry has dramatically changed their thought process on young arms in deals. Now, all we need is that one team to make a move, so generalizations here matter little. Still, outside of the Nationals bold moves this winter (I mean, Red Sox dealing Kopech in a deal for Sale makes sense, so that doesn't break any mold), and maybe Jerry DiPoto, it feels like the industry still places an extremely high premium on quality young arms. Thus, I'm not absolutely convinced, in terms of generalized value (which is subjective to my perception right now, and really, again means squat), that Jeimer Candelario can net us Matt Wisler without us forking over more pieces. If it's a spare piece or two, sure. If it's giving up a Chesny Young or Ryan Williams ... I'd probably say okay. At a certain point, though, the line where it becomes too much is closer than it may seem, in my opinion. They don't fit, but Jeimer Candelario would fit on the Orioles as well. Hardy's gone at some point, so Machado would move back to short. They could move Schoop to 3rd and find a 2nd baseman, or more likely, try to find a third baseman and keep Schoop at 2nd.

I'm going to be surprised if there aren't at least 2 starters to start the year in Iowa that weren't in the system last year. It's looking really thin at the start of the year for Iowa, and so I think a wider net on depth may need to be contemplated. Legitimately, I'd be surprised if there aren't at least two more pitching moves (1 legit competitor for the 5th job, 1 depth SP added for the upper levels). For example, the Los Angeles Angels Nate Smith isn't a guy that anyone's going to be too excited about. Still, as an older lefty with good command, he's the type of experienced guy we need to add to the upper levels of the system to protect us in the short term. The Baltimore Orioles Tyler Wilson is another guy that fits the mold for what I am thinking about when I think of depth. These guys aren't going to be long term answers, but we were quite fortunate with health last year, and if we aren't as lucky this year, we need guys that we can plug in there for a few starts and not feel like the house is burning. If the Nationals were open to moving Austin Voth, that's another name who makes a lot of sense for us depth wise. Now that he's definitely back with the Brewers, Wei-Chung Wang would be a great get to stash in AAA for depth purposes. Someone like the Mariners Zach Lee makes sense for depth purposes as well. Anyhow, my perception of depth may be slightly different. We look really thin in the upper levels for legitimate starting options, and I think we need to get some guys to plug the gaps a bit, in case we aren't as lucky health wise this upcoming season.

As an aside, the Cardinals ... intrigue me. If things go well, you could see them compete for a playoff spot. You'd almost have to have all the dominoes fall in place for them to see them really dominate, but if enough things go right, sure, they are in the playoff hunt. Yet, the team's fairly thin, the system's fairly weak. It's easy to see them get off to a tough start. Thing is, if they get off to a tough start and opt to sell ... I'm not sure who they can move to net them the necessary returns to cut costs while accelerating a rebuild. I mean, there's Wainwright/Molina/Carpenter. After that? Fowler/Leake would probably require the Cardinals to eat a lot. I guess they could sell some of the younger arms hitting arbitration, or move a Piscotty/Grichuk, but ideally, some of those guys are pieces you build your next team around. Moving Alemdys Diaz makes little sense for them. Hard to see how much Jhonny Peralta could net. Maybe Kolten Wong? In short, on the surface, I tend to think they are in no man's land for an organization - good enough to be ... decent to good, not good enough to be great barring all the dominoes falling their way, but lack the minor league assets or the capability to swing trades for enough quality future assets. I'm actually mildly curious what Mozeliak plans on doing. Now, they had a good draft, IIRC, so maybe their development goes fast and the system looks far better mid-season.

On Jansen, I think it's realistically Marlins or Dodgers. It's possible that the Nationals could backload it insanely, and Rizzo is a good closer on these things, but it feels like it's Marlins or Dodgers, and I tend to think it's the Marlins as well. Mildly interesting thing to me is that I don't know if I see the Dodgers jumping in on David Robertson. Same with the Marlins. I think the White Sox are hoping for that to happen, but tend to think Robertson may be limited to the Nationals, barring a sleeper surprise. That leads to the secondary question - if not Robertson for the main loser of Jansen, then who? Friedman isn't foolish enough that he would absolutely have to have a proven closer, so I could see him exploring multiple arms. This reminds me of a rumor last week that I forgot all about - supposedly, Brad Brach was only going to cost Mallex Smith and more. Now, we don't know what more is, but it sounded like Mallex Smith was the centerpiece. If that's the case, that's something the Dodgers could jump in on (or they could try to pry Britton, but while that would seem prudent for an Orioles franchise floundering in place in some respects, I don't think they do that).

Good for him. We got what we needed out of it, and 5 years, at the rumored 16 mil AAV was going to be too much for this FO to commit. Dexter bet on himself last year, which ended up helping us, and now, he's going to reap the rewards of that by getting the long term security he sought coming off a career year. I hope he does well, although it's hard for me to buy that this contract will look good in 3 years, let alone 5. In the short term, though, that team is improved with him in CF, and Grichuk in a corner. Not really a "star" lineup, but the potential to have a lot of really solid guys up and down.

Not surprised some of the top names talked about were passed on - some of those arms were unlikely to stick in the majors this year. A bit surprised that Wang was passed on, but average, slightly below average fastball limits ceiling. I guess I'm not shocked we passed on selecting people. Still, with 5 spots, seems like something could've been done, even if short term. Curious how minor league phase plays out for us.

I think Frazier and Melky are gone ASAP (both are impending FA's, I think). Robertson's a tougher case. I could see him moved in the winter. That said, there's a limited no-trade, and he's signed down for two more years. He's also coming off a somewhat down year compared to 2015. If the market isn't there, one could argue that they are better off holding onto him and letting him try to rebound a bit. My guess? Since they know each other's systems so well by now, it wouldn't surprise me, if after Kenley signs, that Robertson gets shipped to the Nationals for something like Andrew Stevenson and a lottery ticket like Anderson Franco. Of course, as I type that, that might not be enough for Hahn, so who knows. Hard to see the loser of Kenley (Marlins or Dodgers) jump into Robertson, but could be wrong.

I'd take Eaton over McCutchen. Part of it comes down to the fact that I buy Eaton being hurt in 2015 hurt him defensively, and that he isn't that horrendous as a CF. More importantly, McCutchen feels like a guy right on the edge (Adam Jones falls into this mix for me) - guys who are declining, and who knows when they fall faster. I guess I could buy McCutchen bouncing back a bit, but he has to move off CF. I think the more telling thing for me is that Giolito was being thrown around like he was nothing special and just another intriguing young righty. I mean, I guess it was sort of known by year's end that the FO here didn't view him as their top arm, but for an organization to throw around a young arm like this ... it's like they were worried his stock would fall precipitously and wanted to get something sooner than later. I'm sure if I thought long and hard about it, I could think of exceptions, but it feels like most times than not, when orgs are forcefully trying to move someone, those guys rarely pan out the way they might've been once expected. Again, I'm sure there's cases to contradict this (I think the Braves had soured on Adam Wainwright back in the day, IIRC). As for which trade I would've preferred - I'd take that Eaton deal partly because I think Eaton's a better fit for the Nats, and partly because I'm not convinced Lopez is a starter.