champaignchris

Why? Absent an upcoming trade involving Monty or Q that makes no sense. And even then...

Does RFA really work out for players in other pro leagues. Arbitration is actually kind of nice in some ways, the problem is its so long and drug out after like a decade of control. RFA seemed to have worked out for Zach Lavine and Kyle Fuller just to name two recent local examples. RFA is basically just arbitration by a different means, where the market sets the price instead of an arbitrator. As you say, the bigger problem is that it doesn't happen until entering the player's fourth year of service time, which in many cases might not be until almost a decade after they sign their original deal.

Billy Beane doing Billy Beane things. That looks like a really solid trade for Oakland.

The newspaper used to be pretty conservative, but it has moved slightly to the left. It used to be that their political endorsements would be basically very Republican unless a Democrat was running unopposed. :lol: The Trib was traditionally mainstream, middle of the road, “chamber of commerce” Republican. They’ve been more anti-Democrat machine politics than pro-anything in particular for most of their history. In 2016, they endorsed Rubio in the Republican primary and then refused to endorse either candidate in the general. You can put them with the other “Never-Trump” Republicans that don’t really seem to have a home in American politics anymore.

I've been trying to think of a stat that's better than saves or WAR in terms of how to measure the value of relief pitchers and figured out that Win Probability Added might do the trick since, among other things, it takes leverage into account. Here's the top 10 relievers (made more appearances in relief than starting) in WPA all-time (rank among all pitchers in parens): 1. Rivera 56.59 (5) - Clemens, Grove, Maddux and Spahn are the only guys ahead of him! 2. Hoffman 34.15 (22) 3. Gossage 32.51 (29) 4. Eckersly 30.85 (31) 5. Wilhelm 30.84 (32) 6. Nathan 30.60 (34) 7. Wagner 30.07 (38) 8. Papelbon 28.31 (41) 9. F. Rodriguez 24.43 (56) 10. Kimbrell 24.33 (57) L. Smith 21.33 (78th), Sutter 18.25 (102nd) and Fingers 16.19 (125th) are the other HOF relievers. This tells me the following: 1. Mariano Rivera laps the field by pretty much any metric you want to use in measuring relievers. 2. My reservations about Hoffman are off-base. He belongs. 3. There aren't any big surprises on this list and probably aren't any old forgotten relievers who deserve re-consideration now that we understand the value of bullpens more.

The three top changes I’d make are: 1. Young talent is way, way too cheap. The MLB minimum should be tripled or even quadrupled. As it is now, that 30 year old shortstop might be better than that 23 year old shortstop, but he’s not 10 or 20 times better than the 23 year old. The artificially low starting salary deflates the value of veterans. 2. There should be an age-based aspect to free agency. As it is now, late bloomers like Tommy Pham and Josh Donaldson are absolutely screwed by the system, never getting the chance for an in-prime free agency payday despite putting up elite or near-elite numbers. So maybe a player can opt into free agency at 28 or 29 regardless of service time. 3. The draft penalties should be lessened for teams that sign free agents. The most recent CBA is better than the prior one in this regard, but it still should be reduced more. Teams in the middle-tier in terms of talent still have too many disincentives to signing free agents. They shouldn’t be made to choose whether to improve their team via the draft or via free agency. I’d limit draft penalties for free agent signings to teams in the top 8-ish in payroll, if I couldn’t eliminate them altogether. And a bonus fourth I’m less sure of is to maybe make draft picks tradable. If teams are going to tank, let them tank the horsefeathers out of the place and acquire a horsefeathers ton of draft picks. Maybe speed up the process. Make things a lot more fluid a la football.

This is my problem with putting them in the Hall. You can take any teams top 3 or 4 starters and you would have the same or better results than the best relievers. Anytime 100+ players are equal or better than you ... you're not a HOFer. Meh I doubt many teams have a 3 starter that just converts to as dominant as guys like Edwin Diaz, Britton, Chapman, Andrew Miller, Jansen and Kimbrel have been the last few years. There is a couple 3 starters with especially nasty stuff that might be able to touch that dominance as a reliever but there isnt one on every team. There have been a ton of #3 or #4-ish guys to switch to closer and have 5 or 6 years as dominating relievers. Wade Davis springs to mind. Jason Isringhausen is another. Andrew Miller from your post is another good example. Jansen or Chapman do what they’ve been doing for another 5 or so years and we can talk about the Hall of Fame.

Yeah, he started missing a lot of games starting in about 1987. It’s pretty common for outfielders who get a major portion of their value from speed to have a major fall off in production after age 30 and you see that in his rate stats. But maybe he could have had another half season or so of counting stats during his prime had he been playing for a team that didn’t use outdoor carpet over concrete as its playing surface. So maybe 100 more hits, 5 more HRs, 20 more steals, 2.5 more on his career WAR. Maybe another All Star appearance. Would that have gotten him to the Hall sooner? Don’t know. Wouldn’t have hurt. Dude still had an .880 OPS in 115 games/486 PAs for the Sox in 1993.

He’s played 179 games at SS in his career. Not well, mind you. So I suppose he could be a Javy back up on a short term basis.

There are plenty of arguments to be made that the Hall has already jumped the shark. I don’t think the inclusion of Tim Raines is one of them.

Both teams have been in Milwaukee at one point. Easy mistake.

I hope he’s getting paid a crap ton of money. I understand the view that maybe a second chance for a head gig never comes along, but there’s basically no chance the Orioles are going to be competitive in the 3 or 4 years he’s there before inevitably getting fired, no matter how great a manager he might be.

I never understand this. I overstated my feelings on this. I should have said, I’m not a fan of closers who racked up huge save totals by only pitching 65 innings a season, often in less than high leverage situations. They’re objectively less valuable than your league average #3 starting pitcher. I have no problem with Gossage or Wilhelm in the Hall. I will have no problem when Rivera goes in the Hall, probably on the first ballot next year. I’m less enamored with Finger’s, Sutter’s and Eckersly’s resumes, but understand the other factors in each case that made them appealing to Hall voters. It’s Trevor Hoffman that bothers me. Guy only pitched 1089 innings in an 18 year career. Surpassed 75 innings in a season only 3 times. He pitched for a long time and got a lot of saves, but I don’t see anything particularly special about him that differentiates him from Frank Rodriguez, John Franco, Billy Wagner, or Joe Nathan. If you think all these other guys should be in the Hall, too, that’s fine. Also, based on which relievers ante getting in now, Dan Quisenberry should be in the Hall, too. He was unbelievable from about 80 to 87. Was in the top 5 in Cy balloting 5 times in that stretch.

I’m not a fan of relievers in the Hall, but if they must be in there, Smith should be one of them. From ‘82 to ‘91, he had a 2.29 ERA while averaging 90 innings pitched, 31 saves, and 92 Ks to 33 BBs. In 1983, he had a 1.65 ERA over 103.1 innings pitched. Lee Smith is part of my favorite series of horrible transactions in Cubs history: In December 1987, 8 months after trading Dennis Eckersly (387 subsequent saves and HoF) for three minor leaguers who never made the Big Leagues, the Cubs traded Smith (298 subsequent saves and HoF) for Calvin Schiraldi and Al Nipper, both of whom were off the team by mid-‘89 and out of baseball by ‘91. After suffering through 1988 with a way, way past his prime Goose Gossage as closer, the Cubs traded Rafael Palmeiro (3,000 hits, 500 HR, steroids, allegedly bangs your secondbaseman’s wife) AND Jamie Moyer (269 wins, old) for Mitch Williams who only lasted 2 seasons with the Cubs. So basically Jim Frey tore down a good chunk of the prospects Dallas Green had built up to chase after a closer despite having two future Hall of Fame closers already on the roster. Edit: Green made the Eck trade. Frey made the Smith and Mitch Williams trades.

That’s not the most ridiculous proposition in the world. IF he’s healthy enough to pitch 180+ innings and IF he performs just a bit better than his career averages, he’ll be a top 10 Cy Young candidate. It’s not real likely, but it’s better than a lottery ticket.

Wasn’t Baines a Veterans’ Committee selection? Regardless, the Hall loves its counting stats and among eligible players, only Bonds, Palmeiro, and Vizquel have more hits than Baines. Bonds and Palmeiro are excluded because of steroids. Vizquel got nearly 40% of the vote in his first year of eligibility, and between his 2800 hits and 11 Gold Gloves, one would have to believe he’ll eventually get in, too. Not saying I think Baines should be in. Just saying I see the (flawed) logic behind it.

Do they expect Yadier Molina to catch into his early 50s?

Wrigley is an old, dead rich white guy. So is Sheffield. Seems inevitable that there will be a Ricketts street or square or whatever. (Clark was a Revolutionary War general, Addison was a doctor, and Waveland was named that way because it used to flood a lot. Thanks, Google!)

Pretty good gamble for the Pads. He’s been a good pitcher when healthy. Not quite apples to apples, but you can compare the $15M for 2 years they’re paying Richards to the &17M for 1 year the Dodgers are paying Ryu, and this looks like a bargain.

Oooof. If only he could throw strikes.. Through his first 650-ish innings as a MLBer, Chatwood threw 4.2 BB/9. Higher than you might want, but something you could live with, with his GB rate. He threw 8.2 BB/9 in his 100 innings as a Cub. Absurd and something a team can’t live with. Is he permantly broke? Is there any reason he can’t go back to what he did over the first 650 innings of his career? I guess the bigger question would be assuming the general health of the five starters and Montgomery, when would Chatwood get a chance to prove any ability to limit walks? The best case scenario would probably be that he looks more like his old self in Spring Training and gets dealt to some team that Needs a back end starter.

Right. If you’re going to do that, why not just wait another year for 29-year-old Mike Trout.

And in a pinch, he can probably get you 30 or 40 innings out of the pen.

Mexico City is way too big and has way too much money in it for it to not eventually happen. Not this next round of expansion (or moves if Oakland and TB can’t get their crap together), but maybe the round of expansion after that. So maybe 20-30 years. Other than Montreal, there isn’t an obvious expansion (or move) target right now, and Portland, San Antonio, and Charlotte all look like an owner would be signing up to be the next Pittsburgh or Kansas City. So eventually the potential reward of Mexico City will outweigh the risk.

$17M for a 32-year old starting pitcher who hasn’t topped 130 innings in any of the last 6 seasons seems a bit steep.