Transmogrified Tiger

that's a home run

what are you talking about

Neris since May 1: 27.2 IP, 3.58 ERA, 3.99 FIP, 29/13 K/BB, 3 HR He got off to a slow start with all the walks, but since then he's been fine. If the worst case scenario is you are required to pay him 9 million dollars there are many worse things.

The countdown lasted less than 5 months

I saw a tweet in the last day or two say he was throwing in Arizona, per the club.

Someone has to take Leiter's spot.

Spite

More discussion here!

I'm slightly underwhelmed, or at least I'm underwhelmed by the fit. I'm intrigued by the possibility Cowles has turned himself into a potential starting MIF, but that doesn't help short term the way that Leiter does. Neely seems like a decent relief prospect to backfill the 40 man when offseason shuffling happens.

Preseason FG commentary on Neely

Leiter convo here

Getting under the luxury tax is only meaningful if you intend to be way over the tax in the third year, and even that is only means so much when you consider that it happens when payroll is over 240 million. Scenario A Year 1: Under Year 2: 15 million over Year 3: 20 million over Total tax: 7 million, 2.3 million/year Scenario B Year 1: 5 million over Year 2: 15 million over Year 3: 20 million over Total tax: 15.5 million, 5.1 million/year Scenario C Year 1: 5 million over Year 2: 20 million over Year 3: 35 million over Total tax: 28.7 million, 9.6 million/year

Welcome!

Quite the opposite, IMO. The Cubs filled one of their holes with a very good player that didn't touch their prospect capital or add significant AAV to the future to compromise their ability to spend in free agency. In the process they very much signaled their intent to be competitive in 2025. The conclusion is not 'well now they have to trade a very valuable infielder to hope against hope that a prospect that hasn't reached AAA will be better offensively', it's that they will more aggressively use those untouched resources to fill the other couple holes in the roster. I mean, are we really gonna functionally say 'finding catchers is hard so we better trade our 4 win 2B on sub-FA wages because that'll be easier to replace?' It's tying ourselves in knots with arbitrary limitations on what players can be a part of a very good offense.

Not sure why so many people are thinking the Cardinals made out like bandits in their deal, they probably gave up the best player of anyone. At a minimum Edman is similar value to Fedde and more likely provides a fair amount more value over the next 1.5 years. Pham doesn't really move the needle either as he's a league average bat and world class lunatic at this stage in his career.

Passan made the point well in the aftermath of the trade yesterday

Agreed, I'm kinda baffled by people who think the Paredes trade increases the likelihood of Nico getting traded. They got a certain 2025 solution at 3B and kept both their prospect powder dry and didn't add much AAV. Especially since Shaw and Triantos haven't set foot in AAA like you said, it would be counterproductive to trade Nico at this point considering they have one fewer hole with almost the same amount of roster building resources they did yesterday.

No I think it's very fair as a concept, it's just another variant of trading today's production for tomorrow, it's just tomorrow has a different shape. The Dodgers are probably the best match for something like this because they have 37 pitchers on the IL for various reasons. For example, Gonsolin doesn't offer a ton to dream on but very real possibility he's on par with 2025 Taillon next year. Maybe Emmet Sheehan for a more Wesneski-esque addition? Other guys who you can at least squint and see the match even if it's not probable: Luis Garcia on the Astros, and Garrett Whitlock on the Red Sox

Welcome!

I don't think the trade is some grand fleecing, but the framing here is more than a little silly. Bigge is a pop up relief prospect, he's a 26 y/o 12th round college draftee that no one outside the deepest of prospect nerds paid any attention to until about 10 months ago. The upside he has is no more unique than it is for hundreds of pro pitchers. Similarly, Johnson is pitching well and on an upward trend, but he's still a 15th rounder without dynamite stuff throwing 4 innings at a time in A ball. His 'upside potential' is maybe being an up and down depth starter or matchup reliever. These players have value, but they are also very fungible, any remotely competent farm system is churning out several of them every year. And then there's Paredes v. Morel, the idea that Paredes carries 'risk' while Morel has 'upside' is mostly just code for 'Paredes has played well while Morel has not'. Paredes is 4 *months* older than Morel, and has only 1 fewer year of team control. There is the chance that Paredes doesn't continue to hit as well as he has since the start of last year(this is 1000 plate appearances, but I digress). A reasonable version of a regressed Paredes is something like a 115-120 wRC+ with average 3B defense. That's close to a best case scenario of the 'upside' version of Morel if multiple things start going right for him! Maybe he trades some defense for more offense in his version, but the value would be the same. So if Paredes and Morel are at the same point in the age curve, there's little difference in their service time value, and the 'downside' version of Paredes is as good as the 'upside' version of Morel, then why are we framing this in such guarded terms?

Didn't he just miss some time to injury? Could be a precautionary thing.

Since the start of last year, 5 players have a FB% over 45% and a K% under 18%: Paredes, Mookie Betts, Yordan Alvarez, Kyle Tucker, and Will Smith. They don't all overperform xwOBA to the same extent, but I think this grouping makes the point about what the overperformance may actually be representing(a skill and not variance that will inevitably regress).

Players who make a ton of contact and still hit the ball in the air tend to do that.

The consistency is the skill, he is not coordinated enough to be able to regularly make all the movements needed to be successful. He doesn't make errors for lack of concentration, it's because he is not able to make the subtle physical adjustments to the variety of plays he faces as a pro infielder, despite years of repetitions.