Transmogrified Tiger

It hasn’t played a big role so far, but I am so so tired of having to endure central american refs who require blood for a foul and can’t manage the game because it’s three notches higher than their home leagues.

Interesting, thinking on it for a sec I think the full contract would barely ever get used, the additional 3 years guaranteed is a lot of back end risk and the contract if sufficiently high enough is only so much savings compared to RFA. Maybe your Harpers or Bryants but hard to see it applying to more than 1% of the player pool, which then means you're functionallyl asking for the split to be the norm which isn't outrageous but likely to be a big sticking point for ownership.

I linked this in the CBA thread since the bulk of the article is on that topic, but Passan does mention there may be more early signings of significance than previously thought: https://www.espn.com/mlb/insider/story/_/id/32612663/why-mlb-seems-headed-lockout-how-thatll-create-free-agent-frenzy

Passan had the most complete take that I've found on the recent developments, including the ownership proposal that arbitration be replaced with a formula-based decision on salaries for those years: https://www.espn.com/mlb/insider/story/_/id/32612663/why-mlb-seems-headed-lockout-how-thatll-create-free-agent-frenzy From the ownership side, it's frustrating that while there's some benefit to eliminating the contentious nature of arbitration, the dollar amounts don't do anything to move the needle for anyone. Twitter ran with a few examples(using fWAR which was only in the MLB proposal as an example) where some folks would hypothetically come out better or worse, but substantively there wasn't any macro-economic shift that I could see. Window dressing masquerading as substance. On the player side, it's frustrating that they're apparently dead set on keeping arbitration as a concept and preserving that step of negotiation, even though arbitration in its current form is basically haggling over relative pennies and the illusion of negotiation. Slam the economic outcome of that proposal and how it keeps pre-arb guys in indentured servitude all you want, but it's disappointing that they see the mechanism itself as a non-starter just to be able to preserve agent power or map to some ideal around negotiation that the current system doesn't really live up to.

UEFA world cup qualifying is nearing the end of their group stage and there's some interesting matchups this window. For a refresher, UEFA has 10 groups where the winner advances, and the 2nd place teams join 2 Nations League qualifiers in playing three distinct 4 team brackets to get the other 3 spots. So winning the group makes your life a lot easier, especially since there's teams like Wales, Austria, Ukraine, Croatia, Poland, and the Czech Republic lurking in the playoff that could win an elimination game against anyone on a given day. On Friday: - Italy hosts Switzerland, they are tied on points(Italy ahead on GD) with both teams having one more game(Swiss v. Bulgaria, Italy @ N Ireland) on Monday to decide who qualifies and who goes to the playoff On Saturday: - Norway(w/o Haaland) and the Netherlands play Latvia and Montenegro respectively. If they hold serve they play each other on Tuesday in Rotterdam where a Norway win gives them qualification and sends the Dutch to the playoff. On Sunday: - Portugal hosts Serbia, if Serbia wins they qualify and send Portugal to the playoff - Spain hosts Sweden, if Sweden wins they qualify and send Spain to the playoff England and France could also technically get bumped out of the top of their respective groups, but it would require something more unlikely than losing a one off game against their closest competition.

Robinson had already started through the whole Gold Cup by the time he was playing Mexico, but Bello is an interesting point. I feel like the July version of Sam Vines has a bit lower floor in Berhalter's eyes than Yedlin or even out of form Cannon, but I certainly won't be shocked if it's Scally. Unlike the Weah/Arriola decision, it's not one where I feel particularly great no matter the choice.

It's interesting how the magnitude of this game and the 2 game window precluding the need for rotation clarifies the position battles. Steffen v. Turner - I love Turner but I think the consensus around Steffen's shot stopping is unfounded. It's a risk from a shot stopping perspective to play him(for form reasons if nothing else), but you're also playing a good team that wants to press so you gain that back with Steffen's passing. Yedlin v. Scally v. Cannon - In a perfect world this is Scally, but his first game in this system/with these teammates being a WCQ against Lozano is terrifying. I'd normally prefer Cannon to Yedlin but his lack of playing time is concerning too. Can't be too upset or optimistic about any option. Zimmerman v. Richards - I'd prefer Zimmerman, to be honest. I was pleased with his passing in the Gold Cup and trust him as a defender more for a game that's tomorrow. Weah v. Arriola - Weah should start here, he isn't dramatically worse than Arriola in any area(unlike the Konrad/Hoppe v. Arriola decisions) and pinning back Mexico's left back isn't as important as it is for other CONCACAF opponents. If Arriola starts they better be generating oodles of counterpressing opportunities.

Let's play a game about tradeoffs. To set the stage, we'll assume that the Cubs need to make these acquisitions: - SS - IF - OF - Backup C - 2 SP - 2 RP To simplify, let's also assume that after Miley the team has 65 million to spend(which is roughly last year's OD payroll) and that we'll reserve 10 million of that for the Backup C and RP. Maybe it doesn't take that much, but we won't count on it. Now let's see our options. You can quibble with the specific names/amounts so take it more seriously than literally. It's meant to be representative of the cohorts of additions that fit the spending rather than a super cohesive plan for a roster. Option A - consistent FA spending Option B - QO splurge forcing stars/scrubs Option C - Trade allows consolidated spending With the obvious caveat that you can create variants between these, if forced to choose which one would you pick?

Morale: Murderous

I haven't thought it through all the way, and the new CBA seems likely to impact the calculus, but I wonder if pitchers with good results that are 1 year from FA(Bassitt and Manaea in this case) are an opportunity. They're the cheapest trade target to acquire because of the lack of team control, but the QO either doubles that or gives you a rebate on the trade cost, with the caveat that the pitcher needs to be remotely worth a QO the next year(it's not risk-free). The crucial thing is cycling SP year to year isn't inherently creating a ton of performance risk compared to getting a SP for 2,3, 5 years, so from that perspective if you believe in the pitcher then you're basically rolling the dice on injury risk for the upshot of cheap acquisition and maximum roster-building/contract flexibility. Other pitchers who you could at least squint and see falling into this bucket this offseason: Clevinger, Sonny Gray(though he has a club option), Joe Ross, Eflin(though he won't be ready to start the year)

Davies ERA v. xERA(expected wOBA based on exit velocity/launch angle converted to ERA scale) in the seasons prior to joining Chicago ERA / xERA 3.90 / 4.77 4.77 / 4.48 3.55 / 5.17 2.73 / 5.13 (70 IP due to pandemic) And now Miley: ERA / xERA 2.57 / 3.87 3.98 / 3.83 5.65 / 5.63 (15 IP due to pandemic) 3.37 / 4.15 In the same way that every low velocity pitcher you have optimism for is not Kyle Hendricks, every low velocity pitcher you're pessimistic about is not Zach Davies. They have different past results, different pitch mixes, throw with different hands, and even different velocities(Miley's fastball averages 2 mph faster than both Davies and Hendricks) while still qualifying for the 'soft tosser' label.

Heaney went pretty quick

Not really, he's in the pool of guys that if they have a strong year could push into the bullpen by the end of the season, but Marquez having a shoulder injury that(with the pandemic) has meant he has less than 1 pro inning since 2019, which translates to someone you treat as found money if he does look MLB ready at some point in 2022.

In terms of the 2nd tier v. Thompson or Steele, I don't necessarily disagree, but both of those guys threw less than 85 innings this year after not pitching any pro innings in 2020. They need insurance at the very least because even if performance isn't the issue(far from certain!), you aren't getting a full starter's workload out of them. In terms of 'these guys aren't better than Davies', that might end up being true too, but that's the risk you take on by needing to prioritize velocity. Guys with big fastballs who are also good bets as SP are gonna be in high demand, and assuming you can sign more than one is not a great plan even if that's what they want to do(and given the contracts, they might not). You're then left with either risking a lower velo rotation, taking on performance risk with guys with worse track records, or exploring an uncertain trade market where the costs may not be appetizing either.

Given the stated desire to have more velocity in the rotation and the fact that Hendricks, Miley, and Mills all average under 90 (w/ Thompson and Steele not being plus either), it feels like they pretty much have to get at least one FA with plus velo. Setting that standard at roughly 94 mph and excluding QO guys, that’s: Marcus Stroman Kevin Gausman Max Scherzer Carlos Rodon Anthony Desclafani Stephen Matz Jon Gray Yusei Kikuchi Matt Harvey Garrett Richards Michael Wacha Wily Peralta Carlos Martinez Jose Urena Mike Foltynewicz Vince Velasquez I’ve divided those into two groups that are a bit arbitrary, but I think represents a decent point where they could get one from each group, but probably not two of the top group(for several reasons). The trade market is also a possibility of course, though if they can get their favorite from that bottom group on a 2 year deal that might be more worthwhile than the cost to get a SP in trade that’s appreciably better.

Oh two others I forgot. - The other “interesting” SS option I saw when perusing proposals on baseballtradevalues was Didi Gregorius, a Phillies fan of all things suggested Gregorius for Bote. You’d definitely be banking on a post-prime rejuvenation with both the bat and the glove, but he does have some track record and the left handed bat would fit. Plus with the player cost being an underwater trade asset, it might be worth considering if you made really heavy investments elsewhere. - I hadn’t realized how well Tsutsugo hit when he got to Pittsburgh, he could be an interesting option for 1B/DH as a LHH and the Cubs would have plenty of PT to offer.

Some random thoughts after spending a chunk of the weekend looking around at different teams and thinking about player targets: - I’m not sure how feasible it will be to buy prospects via bad contracts. One is that there’s not too many team/player combos in that situation so the pool is only so big, the other is that if the CBA increases incentive to spend(there’s already been a 100M salary floor in a proposal) then the motivation to pay a high player price to dump all but the most toxic deals(Hosmer, Strasburg) goes down. The one exception might be Corbin, if only because Fangraphs made a reasonably compelling case that he’s one adjustment(his stride) from being back to normal, but Washington may not care enough to pay substantially to get rid of him in their current state. - I might be coming around a bit on Story being a good target. He may wind up in the sweet spot where based on most team’s priorities(productivity, age, starpower, length of contract) he’s not quite first choice, but if you believe in the bat at all his floor gets pretty high pretty quick with the defense. In terms of the Cubs though, it does beg the question that if you’re gonna pay 9 figures for a QO FA, why not just go all out for the very best and if you need to pinch pennies then do it down the roster where there’s more variance. - Speaking of shortstops, one name that might work pretty well that I haven’t really heard is Freddy Galvis. Shouldn’t take a long term deal or enormous expenditure given his age, and he’s an excellent complement to the current roster as a LH hitter with pop who plays good defense. I certainly like the idea of Galvis better than Ahmed, who I’ve seen multiple times as a similar bottom of the market solution. - I also wonder if Amed Rosario gets dealt this offseason. He’s a perfectly cromulent player, but the upside isn’t so high for someone who would make 10% of Cleveland’s 2021 payroll, and Cleveland have Top 100 prospects at SS in AAA and AA. Their corner OF situation is pretty dire too, so if they did want to avoid the PR consequences of trading him for prospects, Happ for Rosario is a pretty close match of performance and contract. (Yes the Cubs OF is not exactly full, but easier to fix on the market than SS) - If you want a trade target in a similar mold to Arrieta when he was first acquired, I think Mitch Keller in Pittsburgh might fit the bill. The velocity is there, and he might be a candidate to go bigger on his breaking pitches or simply pick one to throw more. He’s had some small stretches of MLB success, but on the whole the MLB results aren’t there to the point where Pittsburgh might not see much future for him. He’s not arb eligible yet though, and the Pirate rotation is very far from full, so likely an idea that’s a year early.

FWIW, even if you assume Brothers is gone(the other fringe arb relievers already are), Cot’s has the 40 man number around 98 million after Miley. Looks like Roster Resource is right there too (they have $100M). So either he forgot the arb guys or intended to add the player benefits and then forgot to actually do it. Wow how have I gone this long without realizing those Roster Resource pages have multiple tabs, everyone please give Fangraphs money so it doesn’t die.

FWIW, even if you assume Brothers is gone(the other fringe arb relievers already are), Cot’s has the 40 man number around 98 million after Miley.

There’s no take on a message board more boring than “this isn’t important/worth talking about”

Good - Consistent Results. Miley is Top 20 in SP in ERA since 2018 (min 400 IP), with names like Greinke, Alcantara, Nola, Montas, Stroman, and Lynn surrounding him - Handedness. Miley gets lefties out which makes piggybacking an appealing option with righties of uncertain quality/durability(Alzolay, Thompson, Espinoza, Jensen, Killian) - Durability. He's made 28 starts and 155 IP in 8 of his 9 seasons(excluding 2020 of course). While he hasn't hit 170 IP since 2015, having someone who will be decent or better for 5 innings 30 times is sorely needed given the roster - Contract. Getting a player with Miley's track record would've likely required a long term commitment and/or a decent amount more in AAV. It makes for an obvious place where 2023 savings can happen by replacing him internally, which is important since there's zero contractural dead weight coming off next offseason Less Good - Stuff/velocity. One day Miley won't be able to get MLB hitters out, and given his lack of 4 seam velocity, cutter heavy repertoire, and existing HR tendencies, when it goes it will go very badly. The gamble is that isn't going to happen in 2022. Protecting him from the 3rd time through the order will help prevent turning any good outings to bad. - Uncertain spending. We don't know how much Miley's 10 million represents of the amount the team will spend this offseason. If it's 10 of 70 or 80 million that looks very different than if it's 10 of 40 million. For my .02 I'd be shocked if they tied a hand behind their back this early just for the opportunity to get Wade Miley, but we went through this before with how the team spent after signing Kimbrel so who knows. - Lack of competitive solution. While having Miley for a single year is a positive, it means you've only filled the rotation spot short term, and if you're a surprise competitor Miley is the type of arm that doesn't make a postseason rotation or could even get left off a playoff roster entirely. You still want to have 2 SP(in addition to Hendricks) outperform him, be they external additions or emergent players already on the roster

So if my Baseball Reference navigation is correct, the best hitter in the Cuban league is a left handed infielder that just turned 22 and is now a free agent

Probably gonna need a separate thread for laughing at the Mets soon

At City I assume he's making as much or probably more than he would at any place where he would be the starter. He's mentioned in the past maybe wanting a move after this year so he can play more, so not sure if this is a change of heart or about Steffen getting paid and City maximizing his transfer value.

Wow I read the roster and didn't realize they dropped Brooks. Seems like he's taking it in stride. Also I have continued my streak of hate-reading the comments to see which mediocre midfielder eurosnobs are gnashing their teeth about, which I do not recommend at all.