Transmogrified Tiger

https://twitter.com/No_Little_Plans/status/1442907455759867906

Not sure I see enough upside in Sampson to value him being able to fill an emergency starter role in 2023 on top of 2022. He gives up home runs by the handful, doesn't strike people out, and wasn't particularly good at preventing runs in AAA. If that spot becomes necessary I'm okay with it going to some NRI(even if they only can do that in 2021) or existing org depth like Abbott or Swarmer as much as I am with Sampson.

Between recent offseason trends and the CBA negotiations, I think very little activity will happen before January anywhere.

Sahadev did a Twitter mailbag, which was interesting but also a little confusing and I’m not sure how much I can read into it: https://theathletic.com/2848654/2021/09/26/how-will-the-cubs-fill-out-their-2022-starting-rotation-can-they-find-offensive-help-too/ - He fairly casually says the payroll could “conservatively” be in the 140-160 million range, “doubling” the current guaranteed payroll which will be between 70-80 million. - However, he spends multiple questions suggesting that Hoyer will be focused on value signings and not at the top of the market, in particular he name checks Stroman, Ray, Gausman, and Correa as players they won’t be spending on. While I get that in the sense of setting expectations with the average Twitter user if nothing else, he also seems to think there’s no reasonable way to the Cubs being more than long shot playoff contenders until 2024, which is categorically wrong, IMO. He uses the example of being ready in the competitive cycle go outside your comfort level like they did with Lester, but 1) they should be to that point faster than he seems to think, 2) this framing misunderstands some of the benefit of making big additions(Lester helped win a division in 2020 even when not at his peak), and 3) you can only spend so much money if value is your overriding concern. - Despite my disagreement on the longer term chances, he does make the good point that this is the first year in a long while where the Cubs enter the offseason in a different stage of the competitive cycle. This means good things for certain parts of the free agent market(they can offer playing time other teams might not, especially to buy low and/or short term targets), but less good things for others(he mentions Scherzer as a player who won’t consider a team with uncertain competitive chances). - Similar to a lot of the conversation here, he thinks Hoerner isn’t likely to be considered the every day SS(and therefore one should be prioritized this offseason), but that he’ll get an every day workload between positional versatility, days off and the likely DH requiring more PA to be absorbed.

The thing that blows me away about the Cardinals thing isn't so much that they won 11 in a row(teams get hot), it's that every other team in their path has simultaneously fallen on their face. In that same span the Reds are 3-7, the Padres are 2-9, the Mets are 2-8, the Phillies(who needed to make up ground to begin with) look like world beaters at 7-4 compared to that crew.

I'm not intimately familiar with him and haven't seen a single PA of his at the MLB level, but from reading from others and seeing his past I don't have very high hopes. The consensus seems to be that he's a 1B/DH caliber defender that isn't going to hit for corner infield power, and that's a really tough profile to be a particularly useful player. If he can be passable in LF he becomes more interesting, and if the DH gets added like we expect there's at least a chance he can play a part given how few position player spots are locked down, but a 25 year old with the ceiling of Lyle Overbay isn't a profile I'm jazzed about.

I'm probably overfitting this a little bit, but there's a handful of categories in my mind: - Guys we can hope will be above average with a reasonable amount of certainty: Contreras, Madrigal, Hoerner - Guys with enough performance track record to be in that first group but with legit questions about repeating: Wisdom, Happ - End of prime minor leaguers with good small MLB samples: Schwindel, Ortega - Older prospects with a little room to dream on: Hermosillo, Deichmann EDIT: I just realized I did prospect stuff for the pitchers but not the hitters. Davis of course and I'm too lazy now to go into as much detail for the Morel's of the world like I did for the pitchers below. Everyone else I either don't rate(e.g. Alcantara) or is not under contract(e.g. Duffy, Chirinos). On the pitching side: - Guys w/ MLB track records whose place on the roster is written in ink: Hendricks (SP), Wick (RP), Heuer (RP) - Folks whose place on the roster is in ink unless multiple unlikely things happen: Mills (SP), Steele (SP/RP), Alzolay (SP/RP) - The group who are gonna get reliever IP but are subject to fall off the roster if they don't perform: Thompson, Nance, Rucker, Rodriguez, Wieck, Megill, Effross - Pitchers likely to get reliever IP but haven't gotten the shot yet: Leeper, Roberts, Little - SP prospects who could start an MLB game if they start 2022 strong: Jensen, Killian - WILD CARD: Espinoza, Wicks

This is going to be awesome: They're 1 team shy of 48 in 2023 by my count, so my guess is they invite a 2nd division team(until MLS gets to 30) to get to the right amount for group play(not sure if 3 or 4 per group)

PITCH CLOCK PITCH CLOCK PITCH CLOCK https://theathletic.com/2829518/2021/09/17/can-this-minor-league-pitch-clock-solve-all-of-mlbs-problems/ There's also a bunch of quotes from an MLB official(Raul Ibanez), Cal League Manager(Rico Brogna), a couple players in the league, and an MLB pitch clock skeptic(James McCann).

https://www.baseballprospectus.com/news/article/69716/an-alternate-baseball-salary-system/ This is not a proposal that has been made from either side in the real negotiations, but something the BP Author(Jonathan Judge, of catcher framing metric fame) put together in the above article. You can read it with a free BP login, but if you want the Tl;dr - A proportion of all revenue is put in a centralized player salary pool - Salaries are based on previous year's performance using an objective metric(being BP they suggest WARP or some derivation, but the specifics are less important). That means if the performance is equal the pay is equal, regardless of team. Teams do not control salaries in any way(save for secondary effects like playing time), and they pay the same amount towards player salaries regardless of who the players on the roster are. - He briefly describes the need for some type of mechanism to help insure players with injuries don't get screwed, and years of control and the free agency process would need to be evolved to avoid an NBA-esque consolidation of the most valuable free agents. All in all this was more of a framework that's light on details, but at the very least it's interesting as a thought experiment. I had never tried to think through the idea of making team payroll completely separate from the players on the roster before.

When does Fabrizio sleep, would you say

Okay who wished on a monkeys paw that Adams will stay healthy for the US

Longenhagen describes him as a 'gamer' with 'some feel for contact but no power', so I'm guessing the tools are not loud. He's interesting though, he's a switch hitter who has a .821 OPS against RHP and .800 against LHP. It's more than just the last 40 games too, since June 1: 298 PA, .286/.362/.500, 31/76 BB/K

Fangraphs with egg on their face for not putting Happ and Schwindel in their top 50 trade value series

I'm still very much in the camp that Schwindel is a mirage and his lack of positional flexibility doesn't make it worth it to be sure he isn't, but I am interested if he can keep his walk rate where it is or inch it higher. Combining his Cubs time with a career high walk rate in AAA this year is at least something to hope on from a sustainability perspective, and his plate discipline statistics don't paint a dire picture either. For me, that optimism is mostly in the form of 'he can be the last position player on a Cubs team light on position players if the DH is added', but it's something.

Wow AA is older than I thought

We have about 1.5 attackers at a time who are 1) healthy 2) want the ball and 3) can cut out defenders when on the ball, not great

Yedlin obviously got cooked but that’s gonna happen with Davies. How is Brooks 2 strides from Larin to make that a tap in?

Yeah, agreed. The “disaster of epic proportions” was a little much. Doesn't seem like it now but you'll see it when the draft starts and in the years following. Would be fine if the Cubs were winning because of a bunch of young guys that could be part of the future. This team isn't. They're winning because of guys who might be bad as soon as next season. You need to recalibrate quite a bit on what to expect on non-top 5 picks and how good teams are at picking the best players in those spots. Again, absent any other context you prefer to draft higher, but even with the depleted roster with many placeholders, their performance is more important to the team’s future than a couple draft spots and their pool value.

The Cubs draft spot is a rounding error in their long term trajectory. Nobodies like Schwindel being big parts of the success aren’t ideal, but no one should be at all upset about the team playing well. It means guys like Happ and Willson are hitting, the bullpen looks good, and those types of things mean more for the upcoming years than picking 7th or 10th. Contreras has done nothing. He's been hurt for most of this. The guys that are hitting are all 30+ with no future. This is a disaster of epic proportions. Even when the Cubs were really tanking in 2012-2014, they had young guys like Rizzo and Starlin helping them win games. This team has literally nothing of value on the offensive side. Sorry, nope, that’s detached from reality on all accounts.

I just can’t get into tanking for baseball. I feel like it makes sense in basketball because stars are so unbelievably important and it makes sense in football if you need a QB because they are also important. Maybe I should care more because of the extra money for draft spending but I don’t. Sure it’s better if they lost, but I’m also finding joy in watching a team play well completely unexpectedly. There's a huge difference between drafting 12th where the Cubs are likely headed now (or even higher) and drafting 6th The Cubs draft spot is a rounding error in their long term trajectory. Nobodies like Schwindel being big parts of the success aren’t ideal, but no one should be at all upset about the team playing well. It means guys like Happ and Willson are hitting, the bullpen looks good, and those types of things mean more for the upcoming years than picking 7th or 10th.

The two that come to my mind from the second half - Sargent got on the ball with space in the middle, and drove to the 18 on his left(eventually passing sideways for someone to turnover), and he never looked dangerous the entire sequence. Whether it was his left foot, general confidence, or lack of understanding of his teammates it was a really disheartening sequence - Pefok taking the ball off the center back and then getting crossed up with Aaronson on who was running where, eventually misplaying the pass for a turnover Hopefully more time and a better field give them better connectivity.

Agreed. Beyond their defensive disinterest, having Konrad and Dest on the left with Aaronson inside meant that no one was particularly interested in getting to the left touchline, and the central dribbling became real predictable. I think Dest on the left is more palatable in a 3 back, where he has more defensive cover, more license to gravitate centrally, and is more likely to have a different formation in front of him(5-3-2 or 3-4-2-1) to make that flank more dynamic. Probably should've just played Lletget over Konrad at the least to get Aaronson out of the middle. But even with the player selection and player performance being uninspiring, they got a road point, which is all they really need for the first road qualifier in front of a raucous crowd. 3 teams dropped home points yesterday, so beat Canada and take your shot against Honduras, who is not in a great competitive cycle, isn't at full strength on top of that, and will have heavier legs than the US. That will be our last chance til the final game @CR to play on the road in the 3rd match to take advantage of depth/rotation, so while 5 points would be fine, they'll definitely have missed a significant chance to breathe easier.

how do the pirates sell a single ticket all year

Tying on the road is fine, but the road games don’t really get easier and you miss the chance to pad your margin for error.