Transmogrified Tiger

these results are so well aligned with my preferred rooting order that I'm starting to get suspicious that I fixed the games without realizing

we're never gonna be allowed to trade with a New York team again

strong "we're all trying to find the guy who did this" energy from Mbappe after he just signed a deal where he demanded roster input

So, I think the key here is that the official didn't see the fumble. It was more of a strip that a "punch out" and it wasn't until the slow-mo that I saw the fumble. I feel like if any other official would have seen the fumble, they would have picked up the flag. And if you see the ball taken, after the fact, it's not really reviewable to the point you take away the penalty. But if they don't see that the ball was taken away, it's a correct call.....by the rule. The rule is dumb and that may have been a borderline interpretation of that rule. But it's not a terrible call, all things considered, IMO. The ref's interview with the pool reporter claimed a fumble would not have changed his call. The ESPN rules guy(who was basically carrying water for every other call the refs made, including the soft defensive hold on the missed FG) pointed out that Jones braced his fall with his left hand(despite cradling the ball in his other arm), which should have meant no penalty regardless.

Chris Jones just got called for roughing the passer for falling on the quarterback when he had already stripped the QB and possessed the fumble, amazing

This is a similar thought I've had since last offseason and how the team spent when it did spend. I'd modify this to say it's not simply length, but length relative to age. I think Jed is *very* sensitive to how many post-prime seasons get guaranteed in long term deals. It's the only thing keeping me from saying it's a lock that they sign one of the SS. I also don't want to ascribe too much meaning to his comments, others on Twitter have pointed out that Jed holds his cards very tight and there's not a bunch of easter eggs hiding in his phrasing. That said, I think I would generalize to this: - They're going to add more position players than some folks seem to think. Some might logically take away that they won't need the next version of Villar, Simmons, Frazier(or at least all of them) with the depth that's popped up, but I'd say the minimum is 4 new position players and possibly more depending on who may be outgoing(Madrigal, Happ, prospect depth) and/or out of favor(McKinstry, Reyes, Ortega). - They're going to use more resources on position players than pitchers because they think the pitchers are further along as a group, and they trust their ability to get more out of less with pitcher acquisitions. We've gone over this very recently, but that could take the form of signing a 1 million pitcher(or equivalent trade target) instead of a 5 million pitcher, or signing a 15 million dollar pitcher because they think they can make him a 25 million dollar pitcher. I think the 'quality innings' bit points towards it not just being pure volume in terms of additions, but I wouldn't bet my house on that interpretation.

MLS is great! I'm gonna be in Orlando Sunday for their decision day game against Columbus(which is most likely a play-in game for playoff position). Should be fantastic.

I gotta say, I was very down on the wild card going from one game to a series, and a couple close games to start the format may be deceiving me. But the best of 3 over 3 straight days doesn't feel like there's much urgency lost so far.

All 3 games are in St. Louis so any series win will do that?

What was Edman's positioning there, double play width but just about in the baseline? Maybe they don't turn that particular DP on Segura but spot feels like the worst of all worlds

It is foolish to hope, but in this format burning Helsley for 30 pitches and not finishing off the win would be a worst case scenario for the Cards

is that Quintana doing tennis style grunts on every pitch

I for one am comfortable being very clear that you cannot roster Marquez. I get that the stuff is undeniable, but he hasn't pitched in 3 years and hasn't pitched above High A. The 1% chance of closer ceiling is not one you can afford this offseason.

If you want to go bigger with spend on SP1 for the offseason, Madrigal would be a decent starting point in a challenge trade for a cheaper/more aspirational SP2. That said, I'd be a little careful with how much we extrapolate the small sample size defense with McKinstry. He has a decent reputation, but at a glance it looks like his 7 games at SS are doing some heavy lifting in that 0.9 fWAR. He did generally get better as he got regular at bats and shook off the rust from not facing live pitching for a month, but I'm still skeptical that he showed more than Madrigal did. The profile fits the roster better, certainly, but there's a lot of flexible pieces already which means the occasional square peg can be worked around in the name of having the best talent/output on the roster.

That HR brings Bote to a 106 wRC+ on the year in 123 PA, with reverse splits at that(career wise he's split neutral). I know we've all written him off, but I wonder if he's got as much chance of making the team as someone like McKinstry.

I had forgotten Davis has that weird low follow through like Russell did.

His opponents have been favorable, but still that's now 0.7 fWAR in 6 outings/starts for Wesneski

Calabria was just ruled out until after the world cup(maybe more, hard parsing some of the translated headlines) with an injury, so Dest should get a good run of games leading up to Qatar.

Gonna leave it here because this keeps drifting to false binaries. - Everything except the 'top performance' strawman is a good thing. Not being 22 does not change the fact that 28 is preferable to 31, Not costing 1 million does not change 15 million being preferable to 25, and a career of being a 3+ win starter is preferable to someone who has never been a good big league starter. It's a marginal comparison and not pass/fail. - We've got Cubs beat writers on the record that the team values the QO pick around 20 million. If you're worked up about the Kilian hypothetical in particular it doesn't have to be him(another reason it's a potentially good match is their OF is a wasteland, for example). There's differences on the margins but 'Marquez costs a prospect' doesn't pass muster when the alternatives being preferred all bear a roundly similar cost via the QO. - These last two points are baffling. Budgets exist and 10 million is very much a non-trivial amount when it comes to roster building. It could be the difference between getting one SP or two, what caliber of RP they can acquire, if and how they upgrade the catcher spot, or various other position player permutations. Paying 10 million more at one spot absolutely limits their ability to make upgrades elsewhere. That's 100% true when it comes to the SS too, in fact the desire to prioritize a position player star is *why* trading for someone like Marquez or generally not pursuing a top of market SP as the top addition is being discussed, they are the tradeoff! It is not the only path or the absolute truth of optimizing the roster, which makes it so strange that the counterpoint being raised is pretending the tradeoffs don't exist.

The Manchester derby was such a blowout that just now at halftime of Leeds/Villa they started the highlights at 4-1.

You're really stretching the rhetoric here. Every player costs a roster spot, player development resources are not a limiting factor, and any QO'd SP will cost a prospect of significance. No one is saying Marquez would be free, he's far too good for that. He also younger than most of the alternatives, requires a much shorter commitment(limiting the risk inherent to every pitcher, especially the 30+ y/o in FA), and is 10+ million dollars in AAV cheaper than the FA who we'd expect to be clearly better. If you want to say "I don't feel the contract risk with Rodon(or your preference) is that great, and it's better to spend more on this and make do with less on the rest on the rest of the roster", that's logical and fine! But we don't have to tie the argument in knots so that we're saying silliness like "actually trading a prospect for a pitcher is a long term commitment because we might pick up his option and he'll take up time with the coaching staff".

I don't have a problem with Lorenzen or Kowar as 2nd SP additions, though I do have misgivings with each(Lorenzen having not thrown 100 IP/started 20 games since 2015, Kowar being unable to even get AAA hitters out this year in extended time). Bertz said it well that the name of the game is letting pitching infrastructure create opportunities to get more value than you spend, and those opportunities exist up and down the cost spectrum. I do want to be clear on two parts of this though, one of which is that there's a magnitude of difference in certainty/proof of success with Marquez. Yes he's had a down year, but he's also averaged 3.5 wins/season until now and been a rock of durability on top of it, while pitching in Coors for an organization who thinks a pitch lab is for singers. He costs more because he's a substantially better bet. The other part is that the motivation with Marquez is based on the point that there will eventually be a point of scarcity in the resources the team has available to get better, and you'll have to make tradeoffs. The argument for Marquez is that the team has plenty of reason to bet on their ability to level up pitchers, so on the margins they may be better off not paying 25+ million for the Rodons of the world(or the Degroms/Verlanders of the world if they would even want to come) and invest less in the rotation so they can better address the offense. Marquez is a compromise that doesn't gamble the success of the 2023 rotation on rehabbing a completely unproven player(while having at least small reason to think they could unlock another level for him) and lets the team ensure they get the star position player, catcher, etc that a playoff caliber team needs. Plus it aligns with investing big dollars into less volatile assets and not investing long term in pitchers, which on top of being a solid general practice appears to be aligned with how Jed is approaching roster building. It is far from the only way to go about it(I know you've been more keen on going big on SP signings and foregoing one of the SS if necessary), but that's the real tradeoff being made.

The article says the NFLPA fired him, either the PA or the league can unilaterally decide to fire them.

That's one where I think the Premier League is generally more consistent in being a red than other leagues I might watch(though they are never perfect). With the height and enough force to make his leg flex I can't say it's clearly not a red, but a yellow wouldn't be an injustice either.