Transmogrified Tiger

What's the over/under on career IP as a Dodger, 200 might even be high?

I could've goofed the napkin math but that's like 10 wins worse? That's a chasm for a regressed projection system

As an example, Rojas (5), Canha (8), Yates (10), Heaney(12) gets you to 37 pretty quickly as a middle of the road outcome. Depending on how Sasaki pans out and some of the quieter teams that have money to move, you could see money shift among those roster spots for other options in FA(Flaherty? Hoffman? Scott?) or trade(Minnesota, Seattle, etc).

Yes that seems relevant to a discussion of the Cubs signing Josh Rojas, good point! I'll be more direct. I appreciate you've been polite with your posts, but if you're going to continue to exclusively show up to neg people about their opinions of the Mariners or their players, your stay here isn't going to be much longer. We did not ask for nor want a Mariners Ombudsman to make sure everyone is perfectly aligned with your more optimistic view of your team.

See KCCub, the Seattle offense was only horrible for 122 games, bet you feel foolish now that you’ve seen that and a comparison to a Cubs offense that everyone complained about. (Also wRC+ is underestimating the Cubs by 5ish points since their 2024 park factor was an extreme outlier and wRC+ is using multi-year weights)

Not sure there's a silver bullet for this, and I certainly don't give more weight to Merrifield's complaints in particular, but I do think the topic is worth looking into. HBP have clearly continued to increase: 1990: 861 (993 extrapolated to 30 teams) 2000: 1573 2010: 1549 2019: 1984 2024: 2020 When you combine that with the simultaneous rise in velocity, there's no question there's more danger to hitters. They certainly bear some responsibility with their positioning, but with the steady increase in walk rates and emphasis on movement and missing bats(while de-emphasizing pinpoint command), there's little question to me the increase in danger to hitters is mostly on the pitching side. As to what to do about it, as I said up top I'm not sure there's an obvious solution. Ejections or making HBP a 2 base penalty feel like they create some perverse incentives for the hitters. Maybe something at the macro level would work, e.g. every X HBP(or HBP that meet criteria of 'dangerous') for an individual pitcher or team results in a suspension.

Not worthy of its own thread, but this is a fun MiLB reliever addition Heller had terrific K/BB numbers in AAA, and after some initial HR trouble(and a horrible 2 outing MLB cameo) ironed that out and was outright dominant in AAA before getting called up for another MLB audition: 10 IP, 10 H, 4 R, 12/5 K/BB, 0 HR

Fangraphs says Brujan is out of options. Since the Tucker trade negotiations began in earnest, Jed has traded Paredes, drafted Workman, and now traded for Brujan. The latter 2 have zero material cost so could very well be nothing, but they sure didn't *have* to take a Rule 5 pick(Jed hadn't taken one yet) and they sure didn't need to take on an out of options utility player to get rid of Mervis.

The Cubs rank in CBT payroll from 2016 to 2020 was 4th, 9th, 5th, 2nd, and 3rd.

why would they not just sign a 1B that hits better than Gleyber rather than continuing the charade that he can play 2B

Tucker played 125 games in CF in the minor leagues as well, compared to 11 at 1B

I just can't imagine Jones is actually available for less than a beyond the pale deal. Probably a timeshare-esque bait and switch to get interested teams talking and try to sell them on Keller.

I kinda wonder how much the Luzardo pursuit was about making sure they weren't stuck if Bellinger couldn't be traded, since he is on the low end of AAVs for reasonably available SP targets.

Something I've been thinking about since the Tucker trade is this quote from Hawkins: It's possible that he meant it more generally in that they'll bring in someone in some fashion, but it would have been easy to not say "on the free agent market" so I'm thinking they have a specific target in mind. I think what you're looking for at a minimum is someone to provide some offensive floor and not be an uncompetitive defender at 3rd, and hopefully help with one of these other bench archetypes: 1) Platoon 1B hedge for Busch, 2) 2B backup (preferably LHH), or 3) Platoon CF hedge for PCA. Of the options out there, there are a few(Polanco, Solano) that would be good fits but they might not be able to be competent enough defensively. There are a few that are good options for number 2(Rojas, Urias) who might be able to sign with teams offering a larger role. And there are a few players with pasts that could support them filling number 1(Moncada, Drury, Urshela) who have struggled so much recently that they'd be big gambles as a prospect handcuff. There have been basically zero rumors about who this might be, so I'm very curious about what they plan on doing. I think I might be coming around on taking a stab at Urias if they can? He's got age on his side, is a good bet for a league average bat, and if you are willing to look past last year's limited time when dealing with injury, a cromulent defender at 2B and 3B. The main downside is from a pure splits perspective he's a bit duplicative with Shaw, and he's a bit small to fill in at 1B even in favorable offensive matchups, but there's no perfect option here.

yeah you add Luzardo and a good pen arm or two and you're neck and neck with the Braves for 2nd best projection in the NL

Nico did back up Dansby in 2024. He's likely to in 2025 as well as long as he's on the roster, but if Shaw or Workman make the team then they would be options.

Since this deal is done let's funnel further discussion here

Yep, I also think the difference between Warren and Poteet is not nearly as much in practice as it is in hype. I'd much rather have the marginal dollars this year and next than hold out just for the dice roll that Warren is better than next-gen Wesneski.

hmmm

I had not thought about the 4 lefty impact on IF defense, that's a good shout. I'm a little confused on the OF piece though, why would more RHH mean increased importance on 3B/SS defense, but also increased importance for RF defense over LF?

I would make two caveats to this thinking. One is that it pretty much has to be Luzardo for SP, especially with the outgoing resources for Tucker means that doing a more substantial trade is less likely unless a team is in love with some down the list prospects(maybe Tampa?). If the Marlins have a change in heart or Luzardo's medicals show he has boneitis, there's not an obvious plan B and you really need an SP. The other is that you really, really need a bench infielder to provide some floor. Doubly so because Paredes went for Tucker and they got Kelly over Jansen, the lineup as is risks being pretty shallow. Imagine a sophomore slump for Busch and then look at the back half of what's projected, it's not great. With that in mind, even though Tucker definitely helps, you can't risk an 80 wRC+ out of 3B, and as much as I'm intrigued by Workman and excited by Shaw, both of them struggling to that tune with the bat(at least in the first half for Shaw) is far from unlikely. Long story short if I were Jed I would hold firm to see if I could get Luzardo over the finish line in the next couple days, but if not I think you have to yield. Preferably that's the same money you want picked up but a lesser prospect return, but even if it's cash there are worse things than shaving a couple million off your budget for RP and bench.

Probably because the payroll blueprint tool defaults to Seiya in RF so it's easier to type Tucker into DH (over Bellinger who needs replaced in this scenario anyway) than to do it in RF then have to re-do Seiya at DH

As a starting point, one of Busch or PCA is likely to sit against all LHSP in that setup. Those 2 are among the bigger variance options so there's a non-trivial chance one of them is not starter caliber(at least with the bat). Bellinger has exceeded 130 games once in the last 4 years, Seiya has never exceeded 140 games in MLB, and PCA has had a significant injury in his past and plays a reckless brand of baseball. You combine those with the regular 10-15 games of rest players need in the modern game and I think this is a problem that exists way more in our December brains than the June reality. If it does, it is an incredible problem to have and probably means the team is winning a lot of games.

The insinuation is that they don't have to trade Bellinger. They don't have to make a trade for playing time purposes, 6 players for 5 spots(OF/1B/DH) is fine. In practice they likely do have to do it to make the money work to upgrade the pitching staff and bench like they want.