moonslav59

Yeah, maybe we should have not spent so much on making every other position so good. It would be nice to have a stronger pen, but our pen is not weak. It would be nice to have a great defensive catcher that gets the most out of our staff AND can hit, but our catching position is not weak. It would be nice to have a 2Bman we can count on, but with 3 of them, our 2B position does not appear to be weak. Our 3B position was very weak last year, but nobody talks about not spending there. We'll make do with what we have, and we have a solid team that is better than everyone else, despite our issues in the pen. We have a solid rotation with decent starter depth, especially if Wright is well. I'm super pumped about our chances. If the pen ends up blowing our chances this year, then that would suck, and many here could be vindicated, but I'm still waiting for someone to say where DD should have skimped or traded someone away, so we could get a closer? Beni? Porcello? Okay, one could argue for not signing Eovaldi and letting Wright, Johnson and Velazquez fight over the 5 slot. We could actually let Eovaldi close. I'm not sure the Pearce signing would have helped us upgrade the pen as much as some here seem to want.I guess we could pin our hopes on oft-injured Moreland and Chavis at a position most teams rake. I love this team. I think the whole great pen movement has peaked. Maybe DD is ahead of the curve. Or not.

That's been my point all along. The vast majority of players never get that big payday the big FAs get, and in theory, if the big FAs hot less, maybe there'd be more money to spend on mid-range contracts. Make the arb years start earlier for those who never have long enough careers to get even one nice arb salary year. More players get multiple arb year salaries. Spread the wealth to more players, and you'd think the majority of players would vote for the deal, even if their total piece of the pie doesn't get bigger or much bigger.

Or, a RP'er comes in with 2 outs, loads the bases and gets one out for a 0.00 ERA. Another RP'er comes in with no outs and loads the bases. He has to get 3 outs to get a 0.00 ERA while the other guys just one. Guys like Kimbrel almost always come in for clean innings, but other RP'ers hardly ever do.

98 wins and a maxed out playoff run to another championship would be just as nice. Doing it without Kimbrel might make it seem sweeter.

and runs, apparently. Mybe just GWRBI should count.

OPS against is a better stat than WHIP, and I think both WHIP and OPS against are better than ERA for RP'ers who often come in for partial innings.

I realize that and have said it. Who wants to risk a learning curve when we may need every win to win the division? What if Swihart never gets as good? Swihart did have a chance years ago and did not show he got better when he caught some pitchers a lot.

By and large, they do get better performances, but many sample sizes are very small. To get a RP'ers PAs sample size large enough, you have to go career, and maybe one catcher caught the guy more his rookie year, when he sucked. Here's Barnes... OPS against/ERA (PAs) Barnes .643/3.72 with Vaz (363) .676/3.80 with Leon (303) .861/5.02 Swihart (169) and Hembree .740/3.52 Leon (365) .843/4.20 Vaz (329) .579/1.82 Swihart (97) Is this sample size big enough? Kimbrel .495/1.95 Vaz (332) .499/1.95 Leon (306) .813/16.62 Swi (25 is certainly not enough) These are our 3 most used RP'ers over the last 3 years. Am I missing something>?

Yes, and I posted RP'er numbers. I don't want Leon catching Porcello. I don't want Vaz catching Sale & Price. Do I have to specifically come out and bash them for anyone to see it is a form of criticism on Vaz & Swihart when I say I want only Leon to catch Sale & price?

Yes, which would be and is captured by SLG% and its influence on OPS against. .448 ATL (.208 SLG) .569 SDP .514 BOS (.267 SLG)

There are different levels of comfort and discomfort. I didn't think it needed to be said.

I criticize catchers that do badly with certain pitchers all the time.

Not as much as a starter you catch and only catch all season long. Plus, Leon and Vaz do better with most RP'ers than Swihart does. It's just not as stark.

Thanks for being honest. I'm not a huge Law fan either, but it's helpful to get several opinions through various rankings.

So, if a RP'er who only comes in for 1 out has a 1.50 ERA, he's better than a RP'er who almost always comes in for 3 outs (like Kimbrel) and has a 2.00 ERA?

I agree, but even if Poyner looks better than Hembree in ST'ing, we'll go with the out-of-options Hembree to keep all choices within the system. I like Velazquez more than Thornburg, too, but if THornburg can return to just 80-90% of his big year with MIL, we will give him a shot to show he can do it. We may also start someone on the phantom DL, if we really want to add someone below the line to the 25 man roster.

We've already done more than that.

Does a slight edge over 6 innings outweigh a deficit over 3 innings? We'll find out. I think the odds-makers will give us the edge on opening day.

Where did Law rank Andujar in 2016, 2017 & 2018?

Haven't we all been saying for years that GMs are dumb for paying big-named FAs basically for their past performance and not future projected output? So, maybe stat geeks have shown them the truth and they finally realized the initial bump you get for these mega signings almost always sours over time, often over a short time. I still think Machado and Harper will get mega deals- maybe not $300M and probably not 9-10 years, but they will do fine. How are you so sure the strong possibility of a recession is not playing a part in teams tightening their budgets?

So, Law never moved Andujar up in his rankings after doing well in the minors? How many times does a prospect improve in the minors and then still never make it in the majors? Should a rankings guy be bashed for not moving some guys up for doing very well in the minors? I contend that nobody can be "proven wrong" until after the prospect makes it to the majors and does well, okay or poorly for a few years.

We've added Eovaldi and Pearce for a full season and have Thornburg & Pedey returning from total lost seasons (maybe). Losing Kelly was not huge, and Kimbrel dropped off a lot from 2017. There's a chance the additions I mentioned offset or surpass the loos of Kimbrel, but "not improving" is a fair opinion. The Yanks made some gains, for sure, but not having Didi and other questions still linger. It won't be a cakewalk for sure, but I still think we have a slight edge- on paper.

That's as realistic as anyone can be.

I agree, but then,,,, There is still spending going on. The Sox will spend the same. The Yanks and Dodgers added salary. Maybe the owners sense the economy is about to collapse. There is a lot of similarities to the late 1920's and many economists are forecasting a recession.

Can anyone really be proven wrong in the minors?