Bertz

My two guesses are they didn't think the guys would 100% buy in/adapt to the approach and lose their Donging ways but more blend it with their Dongs and have a super approach and also in that article Chili mentioned pitchers "pitching away from launch angles" or something. Maybe they thought pitchers would correct faster against the launch angle revolution and get ahead of it with an approach Chili ball would have the offense ahead of the curve vs the league? Either way it was a horsefeathers up and they failed and am glad they admitted it and moved on. I think it's basically this. JD Martinez, who is probably the smartest hitter in the league and basically the Che Guevara of the fly ball revolution, has embraced Chili ball a little bit. Last year, JD went to the opposite field 28.9% of the time. This year it's 31.4%. Last year, JD hit 38.3% of balls on the ground, this year 43.5%. And with it, his K% dropped, his BABIP skyrocketed, and he had a career year. The high fastball has never been more popular, so somewhat lower launch angles are probably called for. I think the key is balance. You could argue Chili ball helped Schwarber, who was an extreme fly ball hitter in 2017, but became more balanced this year and saw his K's go down and his BABIP go up while losing practically nothing off his HR/FB rate. Almora and Contreras, two guys who were already too GB heavy, clearly suffered (though I tend to think Contreras probably just got worn down). Russell became a total horsefeathering mess, probably because he never really had second deck power to begin with. tl;dr Chili, like his namesake, has its place but is best enjoyed in moderation.

this is where DVOA gets me, KC's defense is near the bottom in ypg allowed if not THE bottom, and yet DVOA says they are #1. I understand yards allowed isn't a great indicator of what FO is trying to sell here, but that is such a variance I start to doubt their methods. DVOA is clumsily named, even though it has "defensive" in the name it is not just a stat for measuring defense. It's in the name to convey that the stat takes opposing defenses into account, but the wording can lead to people (perfectly reasonably IMO) making the mistake you did here. You're right about the Chiefs. As of last week they were 2nd in offense and 28th in defense. I assume at this point they're something like #1 and #25.

Doolittle is great, but I don't imagine he'd be prohibitively expensive in terms of players. He hasn't pitched a full season since 2014. He's basically Morrow but not currently injured. Plus, this year's FA class is loaded on relievers. Depending on how rebuild-y the Nats are feeling, I think Montgomery would be plenty.

Shiraz has gotten a lot of love over the years in puff pieces about the FO. It's not shocking that he's leaving, but it's a little shocking that he doesn't appear to be getting a title bump to GM. He should probably be McDaniels' version of Jed Hoyer.

Other than the whole missing wide open receivers thing How many times did this actually happen? Honest question, I missed the first half. Didn't see him miss in the 2nd. He completed 70% again. There was a really bad one on one of the first two drives where Anthony Miller had no one within 10 yards of him on third down and Trubisky way overthrew him. Generally though, I think yesterday is the type of game you expect from a good young QB. There were three "what the horsefeathers" plays I remember: the aforementioned throw to Miller, the red zone pick, and that across his body nonsense throw to Cohen. All three were bad, and he needs to cut those out. But all young QBs are going to make bad plays. What's important is A) there is a good ratio of good plays to bad and B) The trendline of bad plays is pointing down. I felt positively in both respects from Mitch yesterday.

Pretty sure that's a new deal, or at least his new AAV would be based on the three remaining years as opposed to his full 7 year deal, which is what we care about.

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/playoffodds Playoff odds still paint a pretty rosy picture. They saw Miami as a top 10 team coming into last week, so don't penalize us too bad for losing a squeaker to them on the road (even with the Osweiler factor). And the fundamentals (light schedule, lack of a scary division rival, bifurcated NFC) are all still as true today as they were Saturday. I also don't think losing this week's game would really move the needle much on the division. The Vikings and Packers still have the Pats on the schedule too, and they have to go into Foxborough for their games. All three games are likely losses.

The payroll's not coming down unless we dump salary or backfill guys with prospects. After 2019, we have a couple guys hit FA, but most/all of that money gets eaten up by arb raises. After 2020, a ton of money comes off the books, but that is because practically the entire pitching staff besides Darvish hits free agency. The year after that, more money, but it's because Rizzo, Bryant, Schwarber, and Javy all hit FA. Realistically we really need to hit on 4-5 pitching prospects in the next two years or we need PTR to be cool with a $300m payroll to be able to do anything beyond Bryce Harper the next few years.

He turned into a hot take doom boner artist towards the end of his CSN tenure. I assumed he was still a good writer just trying to goose his poor traffic numbers, but given that he's stayed that guy at the Athletic I guess he is just fundamentally a hack.

MLBTR has their arbitration projections out. https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2018/10/mlb-arbitration-salaries-2019.html If they cut Russell and Kintzler exercises his option, I have the Cubs at $205.3m ($0.7m under the cap) for tax purposes right at this moment.

It sort of irks me when a guy's scouting report changes on a dime in like a month post draft. I've seen no mention of Nico himself making a fundamental change since May, and being a Stanford guy who was always on the periphery of the first round it's not like there were limited looks on him. So were the amateur scouts lazy? Working off an older report when he actually was just a slap hitter and never updating their priors? Or did they just assume because he's short, white, fast, and/or at Stanford (is the Stanford swing still a thing?) he doesn't have power? Are the pro scouts jumping the gun, getting googly eyed because of a great couple of weeks? Is his stock being inflated just because he whooped ass against some 18 year olds, and in reality he's 100% the guy from his pre draft reports? There's a breakdown here somewhere. I'm really interested to see what comes out of the AFL. because the top talent evaluators are typically there.

I think, no matter what, the team needs to come away this winter with a starter with minor league options that they feel comfortable throwing into the rotation right away in the event of injuries. Ideally he's a fun prospect, but even if he's just some high floor guy that's alright. That way, between this new guy and Alzolay, you should have at least one guy down at Iowa you feel good about at any given time. If Hamels stays, I think Montgomery should not come to camp as a starter. Either have him be a setup guy directly replacing Wilson, or ship him off somewhere. If we need options beyond the main five, Smyly, and the two guys down at Iowa, then we're already so horsefeathered Montgomery would not make a difference.

They really ought to push back the season a week or two. Early November is generally better weather than late March/early April. A lot of older sportswriters raise hell at the idea of November baseball, but who gives a horsefeathers about them?

I wonder if $40m over the cap is not as much of a red line as we expected, or if they're just particularly confident that they can dump any salary they need to. Otherwise I'm not sure how keeping Hamels works. They're already right around the LT threshold here as the offseason begins. If they're no longer married to Schwarber, he makes the most sense to go in the event they get Bryce. It's a clean 1 for 1 swap on the roster, whereas when dealing a Happ or someone you worry more about that loss of positional flexibility.

Whether it's the lingering knee injury or being 35, Rodgers has been decidedly mediocre this year. Now that obviously won't keep up, but if he's more Pro Bowl-y than MVP-y going forward, I don't think the team around him is good enough for them to make the playoffs.

Desmond was never good at SS and hasn’t played meaningful innings there in 3 years and he’s been a negative WAR player 2 straight years. Bote is a better backup SS option than him. That's fair (also, I forgot his year in Texas so I thought he'd been a SS more recently). I'm a little bullish on him, but overall it's more of an accounting exercise than a trade, much like the Dodgers/Braves deal last year. Some money needs to be shifted around if we want to do anything in addition to Bryce this winter.

Speaking of the Rockies, Ian Desmond is an option I like in a bad contract swap. He would fill our backup SS role. and is still useful against lefties. More relevantly. he's due $40 million the next three years, with a cap hit of $14m per year. Chatwood, Duensing, and Kintzler are due 34 over the next two, including a cap hit of $21.1 this year. That cap space would be hugely valuable this winter, especially if the Rockies send along a little extra money to balance out the total outlays.

The difference is talent. I think Theo sees himself as the good guy. He pulled the trigger on Chapman because when push comes to shove he's more competitive than altruistic, but with Russell even without all the baggage he'd be a pretty marginal asset. It shouldn't matter, but it clearly does. I could also see him doing the right thing on this one in an explicit effort to try and make up for Chapman.

Looks like Mathis(1), Grandal(2), and Maldonado(8). Austin Hedges(10), could probably be had in trade without it being painful. Also. I find it funny that Alex Avila is on the positive side of the ledger, after being horrific last year. I think this stuff is generally directionally correct, but IMO the magnitude is probably ~half of what the numbers say.

You only usually go down if you suffer a catastrophic injury that will almost definitely keep you out the entire upcoming year. And even then I don't think you can go below 80% of what you've made previously. Most guys. even after a down year, still get a healthy raise. I'd still expect KB to get ~15 million.

Hamels is pretty comfortably worth 1/20. IMO, but I don't expect him back. The team's payroll situation is too tight currently, and picking it up and trying to flip him could be too problematic for what would likely only be a moderate reward. I expect one of Harper/Machado, and then a trade of Schwarber or Happ to net some pitching and/or payroll flexibility. If they swing and miss on the two big guys, I see a belt tightening kind of winter, where they try and improve the team's payroll situation going forward while only adding low cost/short commitment types to the big league club.

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/playoffodds Bears now clear favorites to win the division, and nearly 80% to make the playoffs. DAVE, which at this point is I believe a 50/50 blend of how they were projected coming into the year and how they've played so far, has them as the third best team in the NFC (way behind the Rams, slightly behind the Saints, and slightly ahead of the Packers).

There's also his 17 rushes for 117 yards, which would pace to 68/468. Mitch still looked a bit shakey at the start of the game, but basically was prime Aaron Rodgers after that first TD. I'm hoping that pass got the monkey off his back, restored his confidence and he's good to go from here on. Also, the line was amazing today, I hope they get their due credit.