sk7326

Those 2 titles and 5 playoff spots in 9 years ruined my day many a time. A reign so bad that all his former assistant GM had to do was rehire a bunch of guys who were in organization before 2011 to win a title again.

We can't ... but Gonzalez had an MVP-caliber 2011 season and power was not a problem. The injury hampered his power somewhat maybe - but that was only a modest part of him turning from a potential MVP into Nick Swisher overnight.

Bad games can be painful, but that describes baseball too. What I will say is, a 1-0 game with about a dozen good, serious scoring chances can still breeze along.

Stanton has played more than 125 games exactly one time in his career. This is not Andruw Jones who was in his 4th year as a durable starter and heading towards "best defensive outfielder of his generation". This is not Adrian Gonzalez, for whom most of the 30 GMs would have made that deal given the circumstances. That he fell off of a cliff in 2012 is not something typical of a 30 year old ... certainly not one coming off of the 27-29 seasons he had. Stanton could be a cornerstone OF, but his injury history is a concern - and corner outfielders are rarely worth emptying the farm for. He is a strong on-base guy, good hitter with 80 power ... but he has had trouble staying healthy and adds no defensive value. The Marlins would need a Bogaerts to justify the deal to a very skeptical public - but he does not warrant it.

23 year old Andruw Jones obliterates the other two ... assuming the total package matters.

Catcher is not a need. Could you upgrade on Saltalamacchia. Sure. Could you downgrade and make yourself happy talking about defense? Sure. Replacement level at catcher is basically zero and at status quo there aren't half a dozen teams with better catching situations than ours. Laying out a lot of money on McCann does not create much marginal improvement at that position. He is an upgrade - but for the cost, not a large one. Relief pitching is a need - as is the case for every team. You cannot go in expecting Breslow to give that performance again, or for that matter Uehara. Some of this can be sourced internally, but shoring that up makes sense. More starting pitching is a fair ask if it's not too pricey. Getting some improvement from the outfield offensively would be nice too. Victorino's turnaround was shocking and you have to anticipate some regression for a 33 year old. LF we created a positive situation out of platoons - but Beltran for a short hitch would be an upgrade. But with a QO attached to him he is a non-starter.

Makes sense - although the games waste less of your time for the scores. And some of the best games get you to 3-2 or so.

Webster's upside is not insane - mid-rotation ... which is good, but I'd listen on. The walk rate can be fixed. The homerun rate and groundball rate for a sinkerballer was alarming. De La Rosa has some real promise though. Kemp is one of the 10 best players in the league when healthy. That said, his injury history might be worse (and more problematic) than Ellsbury's. Ellsbury has had some rotten luck on freakish injuries ... Kemp's problems (hammies, shoulder, ankle) speak to stuff which have some pretty good chance of recurring. The Dodgers will drive a hard bargain though - well they should. He is their best player. Ethier they'd drive to the airport.

Oh if you are looking at "healthiest franchise (on the field) for the next 5 years" the answer is CLEARLY Saint Louis ... though Boston is among the elite in that field too ... I mean the media drooled all over Wacha, yet they have at least 3 pitchers with higher ceilings not make a start in their postseason. (Miller, Martinez, Rosenthal - who is a guy with Top 2 starter stuff put into closer since they needed one) And one thing we know is that if an org is lacking depth somewhere, a bottomless supply of arms is a good asset to use to shop for depth.

Drew turning down the QO is interesting ... not surprising. It was a 50-50 proposition. In a way this is the perfect time to have Boras as your client. Shortstop of any sort of quality in this year's market is a 1-man show (well 2 if you count Peralta, which is fair) ... and there will be no shortage of patience waiting for the teams to figure it out. The pick penalty will be tough for a team to swallow, unless you are a team like the Cards (who came within 2 games of a title with a little leaguer playing SS) or the Dodgers (who could move Hanley to 3B)

Ellsbury is probably the best "lead off guy" in the classic sense in the league. Trout did not lead off because he is the Angels best hitter, and you don't put your best hitter 1st. It's not that he can't lead off (he did last year) so much as his superpowers are better used elsewhere.

The money? From the ticket prices, the influx of national TV money from the new contract, and the extra bump that NESN is going to get with the defending world champions ...

Well with Darvish, you also had the live datapoint of how dominant he looked in the WBC - it wasn't grainy video, it was a dude making MLB hitters (in spring condition granted) look bad.

Trout, McCutchen ... Gomez had better numbers, but the lack of track record plus how much of it was tied in defense shifts Ellsbury up to #3 ... but Gomez at #3 is certainly reasonable.

Did it, really? Defense broke the tie when nobody was hitting. That Ross had a solid week does not really answer anything about long term employment. When talking about how much Ellsbury is worth (or anybody else) it is hard to discuss without factoring context ... each team's revenue formulas, etc. Is Ellsbury worth 20M? If I were Seattle who is not very close to contending, not really. If I were Pittsburgh, on the verge of something important and with some extra money that comes with a young team reaching the playoffs a year before? Probably not - but there are some calculations. If I were Texas, who fields a pretty darn good everyday lineup and is probably a player away from being a serious force again? That could be different. Ellsbury is a lot better than Bourn ... although how you regard his injuries (luck vs being injury prone) will impact the valuation. Ellsbury was the 3rd best CF in the league last year ... so stands to reason he will get a big payday.

Yeah, what I have read tracks about not having nearly the stuff Darvish has. On the other hand, Darvish might be the best "stuff" pitcher in the entire league - so I am not sure whether "not as good as Darvish" is really saying much. The commentary I have read in that direction make it much more about what Darvish has so much as Tanaka missing anything. There seems to be some consensus that his splitter is plus, the way you expect from most of the successful NPB guys. Certainly it seems like the control is there, and the radar guns have the fastball at least in the 89-92 sort of range. If a comp is prime Kuroda, that is not a bad place to be. Not a true ace, but nothing to sneeze at. For me the red flag is his missing a month last season. Given how hard these guys are worked from an early age in Japan, there is some risk of whether that is a longer term thing. At the same time, there isn't a FA starter out there without major red flags. Just a matter of what you are willing to live with.

Kazmir is a fascinating possibility ... he might command $5M or so in this environment ... but there is something to be dreamt there. A bit more expensive in the 1-year category might be Dan Haren, whose fastball is below average now, but whose splitter and command are still good enough to be effective. He was good after his DL stint in Washington a year ago.

Of course they do - he has #1 stuff when he is healthy. That has not happened often. But the A's had no choice but to pick up the option. A 25 year old with his stuff and performance (note flashing neon "When Healthy" sign) is too valuable to let walk away for nothing. But if Oakland would take something outside of the absolute blue chippers (and we have depth to offer here), you have to look into it.

There is that, but I also look at his AA/AAA stats ... he struck out 50% more often in his trip to the bigs. But he had some healthy strikeout rates in the minors too - note I don't really care, outs are outs and yes it comes with his patience at the plate. I am bullish on him ... but there are plenty of folks (including on this forum) who watch hitters like him who might strike out quite a bit and conflate that with "not being able to hit".

His career arc has has shown him to be a bit of a "True Outcomes" hitter a la Bellhorn/Napoli/Dunn ... lot of strikeouts, lot of walks, and the ability to square it up with hard contact the rest of the time.

If Jackie Bradley can show the instincts in CF he has shown since his South Carolina days, and if he can just match his minor league on-base numbers - that is a first rate starting CF who'd make an All-Star game or two in his career.

lol

Basically the prospect level would have to be at least as good as the expected value of a sandwich pick. Basically if there is anybody decent in High-A, that would qualify. Also - in a lot of cases I'd agree with you - but in his case, there are multiple teams who could benefit from him, probably enough to result in some potential value ... even if the value is more an Engel Beltre sort of lotto ticket. Personally it would have been hard for me as GM to give him a qualifying offer if I did not have sense that he could be a trade asset. There is just too much risk of him taking the deal (assuming I was truly committed to Bogaerts at SS, which they might not be - which is a reasonable view even if i might disagree with it somewhat).

Lot of this makes sense. The Drew thing less so. The best available SS on the market for a very reasonable hitch ($14 million for a 3-4 WAR player is not at all unfair) - you are not going to get a king's ransom, but there will be a lot of teams lining up starting with the team we knocked out of the World Series. Look at it this way, taking the qualifying offer removes the draft pick penalty, and Drew would have to agree to a trade anyway ... there are possibilities for a player of his caliber.

Ellsbury is gone - there is just too much money and competition out there. He is one of only 2 guys in this FA class with probable All-Star upside. (yes, Ubaldo Jimenez and Tanaka have all-star upside, but I can't vouch for the probability) A lot of teams have a lot of money and nowhere to spend it - so it is hard to expect Ellsbury to return. I don't disagree that signing a Chris Young to give Bradley some relief, and maintain the outfield defense makes sense. I think folks wildly underestimate Bradley's potential as well as what constitutes a good CF. The fact is, if Bradley can be a 70 glove and put together .370 sort of OBP, that is a star in centerfield, even if he is 10 HRs, 15 SBs. Napoli I think comes back. My guess it is on a 1 year with a vestiing option for something like $13M base with an upside of $17-18. You want to protect against him not being able to make starts, but he has shown enough I think for the market to not demand he take a low base salary in 2014. Drew I am not sure. I think his market could be impacted enough by the pick compensation that he takes the qualifying offer - he is still eligible to be traded and there might be a little more possibility there. Salty could go either way. You could sign flotsam like Carlos Ruiz and hold your nose when he has to face righties. McCann is the most valuable but will cost the most, and I am not sure his bat will smoothly go into DH-level when he rides off into the sunset. Salty's BABIP is clearly not going to hold - but his line drive rates have improved every year, and it at least points to some potential actual hitting improvement. He is a dangerous lefty bat who is average to a little below average defensively ... an above average starting catcher putting it all together. There are some hot names in the system so signing Salty for a long run seems foolish (Lavarnway is NOT one of those names) but given the state of catching in the big leagues, he is one of the better ones.