sk7326

On the other hand ... THIS is a bad signing for Seattle.

Good pickup for NYY - good non-signing for us ...

Baseball is set up to help the Yankees make the playoffs - this ain't the NBA of course, winning postseason series is hard, and you gotta be lucky.

I think for the players it is easily the most personal rivalry. The fans will always have the Yankees more. Rivalries are about the games ... it's why I considered the Colts the Pats as a bigger rival than the Jets. It's about the meetings. We've met the Rays a lot with a lot on the line - and (key to rivalries), the Rays have won quite a few of them. It can't be a rivalry unless the other guy wins some.

Basically he's not really an improvement over Saltalamacchia, aside from not having to pay him for more than a year. Is that better defensively than Lavarnway - yes. Is it some reason to do cartwheels over spending MORE this year on the catcher position than last season? Not at all. In the grand scheme of things, this will not ruin our summah - maybe he is a win or two worse than Salty, maybe less than that. But it is not a very efficient use of $8M, especially when the Marlins for $1M less of AAV got a better player. The Ruiz deal looks even ghastlier for the Phillies btw.

Choo's patience is terrific, and in his career best year this was the case. Neither guy is good against lefties, but at the same time the positional value cannot be ignored. Ellsbury's bad lefty bat is a bit more playable (as a plus-plus CF) than Choo as a solid corner guy. Certainly putting a guy who struggled against lefties like that in an offensive position is a worrisome prospect, especially at the $20M sort of price point. Now Choo's WAR last year understates how good he was a little bit because he was playing out of position (and thus poor defensive numbers), but the increased offensive expectation combined with the split raises eyebrows. I certainly wouldn't call Ells for Choo a net plus.

Ells was a good signing ... FOR THE YANKEES. When you get to deals like this, it is useful to stop pretending that the purchase decision is the same for every team. Clearly the Yankees will benefit hugely from making the playoffs (in terms of the revenue streams they get to enjoy), and they just do not have a lot of impact position guys at the top of their system. While it is not reasonable to expect Ellsbury to have his 2011 power surge, it is MUCH more likely that he will be a double digit homerun sort in Yankee Stadium where his swing will allow for a number of lazy fly balls to turn into homeruns. With the free agents, the Yankees could see enough improvement to add 5-10 wins, and whatever $$/win function you want to assume - the Yankees is among the largest. It also allows the Yankees to take Gardner and possibly spin him for some farm help - it obviously is not a blue chipper, but Gardner clearly is a mid-level starting CF. The Sox letting Ells go was a prudent business decision - for the Yankees, the signing is sensible too.

Sub .300 OBP, 11 unintentional walks in 503 PAs, making Middlebrooks look like Adam Dunn. Especially when compared to the stunningly reasonable deal Salty landed with Miami, not a great use of $8M. That said, short hitch and clearly keeping the seat warm for somebody like Vasquez. But this ain't Yadier Molina back there, and it is hard to argue that he really is an improvement over Lavarnway especially for the money.

Kemp is - when healthy - one of the ten best players in baseball. That is a ... giant ... flashing ... neon ... caveat though. The Red Sox (who I am certain are 99% not doing this) should not pay full price for him. I understand the Dodgers want a good price - of the outfielders they have to trade he is the most gifted - and the Red Sox have a lot of prospect depth, but you have to play hardball here.

You can never have too many capable relief arms ... and a ground ball specialist to boot.

Adrian Gonzalez spent his entire starting career with San Diego, before the 2 trades. He played through shoulder surgery which apparently turned him from a superstar into a good not great 1B. That an article called him a mercenary does not move me at all. That he could not turn Kyle Weiland or Tim Wakefield's corpse into competent starters moves me even less. Mercenary seems like a peculiar charge - the ability to change jobs (which most of us actually have) is not really a reason to bash someone is it? After all, this is a job, like anyone else's.

Maybe, maybe not ... Bradley last year was a totally different animal - he had hardly any experience above single A. It was reacting to a spring which the coaching staff could not ignore. This year is much more in line with his development - he has conquered every level they have given him that was appropriate. His development curve is quite a percentage bet to be a contributor next year. As long as you are prepared for a 2 win sort of season next year and not a 2013 Ellsbury one, you probably won't be disappointed.

David DeJesus with a plus center field defensively = an All Star Puig is an otherworldly talent, and Trout is the game's best player ... Bradley does not have to be either of those guys to be plenty good, even in year 1. All he has to do is approximate the OBPs he has shown at every level of baseball he has had a full crack at, and that is a clear solid starter if the defense is as expected.

Depends on your definition of immediately. Pedroia had a robust .182/.308/.236 in April 2007. Bradley in his cup of coffee had .189/.280/.337. Nothing to brag about, but the OBP skills are there - just need to strike out a little less (like back to his norms - and he shows every indication that he will strike out a good deal) and he'll be fine.

His 2013 UZR has to be taken with a giant bale of salt given the playing out of position. In most contexts he is ok. As far as Bradley goes - competition is healthy, but then so is being decisive, especially in this market. After all, in 2006 Pedroia was hoplessly overmatched. And he got off to a bad start in 2007 too - there was every reason to pull the plug but the team stuck with its evaluation. Pedroia had the big May and suddenly life got better. Both Middlebrooks and Bradley were victims of some extreme small sample size shocks causing hysteria. Middlebrooks that hot streak coming up from Pawtucket, and Bradley with that amazing spring despite almost no performance history above Single A. The injury and the lost reps clearly affected Middlebrooks and he basically lost a year of experience, I still like him because the talent is there and great athletes are good guys to bet on. Bradley, if you look at what he has accomplished at every level of baseball for his age - while it is not as extraordinary as Bogaerts (and guys with Bogaerts' progress through a system almost never "FAIL") - he is very much on track to be a really effective starting CF. I think his approach and secondary skills are good enough for him to figure out big league pitching on the job while not being an automatic out - as long as the team is patient. The thing he has to learn (how to hit grown man breaking stuff) can only come up in the show.

I like Choo's on-base skills, but do not like his age and increasingly problematic splits.

Young to Mets made sense, read Sox were in on him - but at the end of the day a guy like him needs reps. I liked him as a backup with upside, but I am sure he thinks he needs some guarantee of PAs to rebuild his market value. Maybe the next option is a Rajai Davis - alternatively just keep things in house. Beltran at a 3-year hitch is hard to swallow as a matter of business case.

Papelbon probably was ... in 2007.

I agree mostly, although if Profar gives them a shot at David Price, you have to wonder. There is a CEO waiting to make a splash possibly.

There has never been a player in the history of spring training quotes who wasn't in the best shape of his life or who did not think the team had something special inside of them.

A closer who pitched 140 innings that season!!!

The offense had poor batting averages but got on base - and it has to be noted just how many pitcher-friendly parks they played in. The position players remained solid throughout on defense and the starters ranged from outstanding to good enough.

The "who won with poor closing" question is a bit of a red herring. Shoddy relief pitching will kill you in any short series. It is not the magical 9th inning. The more important question is who has won with "non-special" closing, and the answer is "a lot".

Fielder had an off year, but he is 29, and if you look at the batted-ball stats, his line drive rate was actually a lot better than it was his last 2 seasons in Milwaukee. There is some good evidence that the bat speed is not diminishing. There is a huge risk taking on that sort of money - but the deal makes all sorts of sense for the Rangers in the short term. $30 million bucks, an upgrade at 1B, an even bigger upgrade at DH if they go that direction with Prince (and they really ought to), and finally giving them some options with Jurickson Profar. Detroit it improves their defense a lot, by shifting Miguel Cabrera to 1B and putting Castellanos at 3B. Also frees up money to extend Scherzer. Kinsler's bat should be fine at 2B, though the plunge in power the last two years raises eyebrows but at least cheaper eyebrow raises than Fielder's.

I think in both those cases it is a lot more complex than that - Tampa gets a lot of mileage out of their offense with approach. And both of the teams (like Boston does) built teams to their home ballparks - both play in extreme pitchers parks, and they gear to it. And Oakland did not have Justin Verlander - or the best baseball team of the last 20 years. Tampa lost to the wire to wire best team in the sport. What horrible mismanagement.