moonslav59

Wlel, we're still tied for first!

I had hopes that Barnes or Hembree could advance over the year enough to be a solid #3 or 7th inning force, but I's having serious doubts we'll have anyone beyond Kimbrel and Ziegler we can trust.

If we only had a strong and deep pen that would allow us to yank starters after 5 or 6 innings... 8/30 6.2 IP 1 ER Lost 4-3 8/29 7.0 IP 3 ER Won 9-4 8/28 5.1 IP 2 ER Lost 10-4 8/27 8.0 IP 2 ER Won 8-3 8/26 5 ERs in the first innings against Wright (6 ER in 6-3 loss) 8/25 6.0 IP 1 ER Lost 2-1 8/24 7.1 IP 2 ER Lost 4-3 in 11 innings 8/23 9.0 IP 1 ER Won 2-1 8/22 8.1 IP 0 ER Won 6-2 8/21 10 runs let up in Owens start (lost 10-5) 8/19 6.1 IP 1 ER (9 IP 2 ER) Won 10-2 8/18 7.0 IP 1 ER Lost 4-3 8/17 6.0 IP 1 ER (shortened game) Won 8/16 6.1 IP 0 ER Won 8-1 8/15 7.1 IP 1 ER Won 5-3 8/14 7.2 IP 1 ER Won 3-2 8/13 9.0 IP 3 ER Won 6-3 8/12 8.2 IP 3 ER Won 9-4 8/11 7.0 IP 1 ER Lost 4-2 8/10 6.0 IP 1 ER Lost 9-4 8/09 8.2 ER 2 ER Won 5-3 Our rotation has looked pretty solid, at least for 5-7 IP. It's a pretty incredible streak for our rotation. Only two bad games since August 8th, and those were the Owens start and the first inning back by Wright! This is World Series caliber starting pitching we're seeing. It's just too bad these guys can't go 8-9 innings every night.

To me, it's not all about trading away top prospects. I have suggested many trades with more prospects than the ones we have already dealt. It is about what we got back. I like Kimbrel and Pomeranz, but to me an ace was a higher priority. I like Kimbrel, but his high contractual cost should have minimized what we had to give up. I like Pomeranz and his low cost, but I was super high on Espi- my own personal favorite. In general, I don't think trading 4 prospects for a RP'er is a winning strategy, even though Kimbrel was a top 3 closer. The high contract cost was the tipping point, in my opinion, to making it a bad trade. I do think the trades were made in large part to not wanting to finish last again, and so it was about "win now", but thankfully, the "now" is 2 more years longs as Kimbrel and Pomeranz will be here through 2018. I'm not sure how the trades can have "nothing to do with the players we moved". Of course, what we gave up matters and likely will matter more 3-7 years from now.

If he ends up playing at 3B for a significant period of time, is everyone happy with how much time they gave him on the farm to re-familiarize himself to playing 3B? Just wondering what people thought. It may not even happen. He may be used only as a PR'er, PH'er, DH and possibly a little spot duty at 2B or 3B, but I'm thinking it was a good thing he got some time at 3B at AA, despite the uproar it caused on this board, when I suggested we start thinking about giving him some reps at 3B sooner rather than later. Now, I'm wondering if "sooner" was soon enough.

Agreed. I think the 2 year sample size of JBJ is enough to have stronger faith in his ability level. In 776 PAs, he's at .262/.345/.494/.839. Combine this with stellar defense and base-running and you got a keeper. OF WAR 2015-2016 combined: 16.6 Trout 13.3 Harper 11.4 Betts 9.8 Cespedes 9.0 Cain 8.3 Eaton 7.9 Springer (7 more guys) 6.7 McCutchen 6.6 JBJ He's a top 20 OF'er over the past 2 years. I'll take an occasional prolonged slump.

But, most MLB players who K a lot but are still great, struck out a lot on the farm as well. Moncada has incredible numbers on the farm, so to me, I could care less if he K's 60% of the time as long as he's getting on base 36% or more (38% or more in the minors). His OPS is now higher in AA than single A. That is an indication that he is improving at a faster rate than traditional expectations and protocol. He's got 20 XBHs in just 172 ABs.

Marrero can be used as a late inning defensive replacement after a PH'er is used.

I'm one of the worst followers of the significance of the K both on offense or defense, so this means little to me. I'm not critical of those who use it, but I just don't value it as much as almost everyone else does.

I'm not ready to say that all of DD's trades have helped the team, but other than the Miley/Smith trade I don't see any that have hurt the team. "Not having hurt the team" is a low bar but it IS a bar, and it's one that many GM's don't clear. One of my criticisms of Ben is that he was hoarding prospects while the team was finishing last. At least DD is making an effort. In my mind that's better than standing pat and watching the team circling the drain. Of course none have "hurt the team" so far, because we traded prospects in every deal except for Miley- who by the way, would have done better than O'Sullivan/Owens, but I get your point. We would not have kept Miley as our 6/7th starter and Smith got hurt, but I was responding to the statement that so far, DD's trades have been "pretty good". The Smith trade was the only deal not made for "the now" by giving up some "future", so in some ways, that deal should not even be linked to the others. I totally understand why we made each and every trade. Most did or were meant to strengthen our team now, and in some cases like the Pomeranz deal, for the next couple years as well, at the expense of trading away possible future assets that may or may not amount to a hill or beans or some astronomical super stud. I think with the Pomeranz trade, we have come close to the point where the balance would shift too much towards the now and too far from the future. I had hoped that trading away all the quality prospects we have recently would have netted us an ace, instead of a RP'er and a low 2-3- high 4 slot starter like Pomeranz. That's my own personal preference. Kimbrel, Pomeranz and Smith are all here for 2 more years, so the deals were made for a little extended "here and now". I like that about the deals. Pomeranz does not cost much, so if we were able to fix our rotation for the next 2 years by acquiring him, then our precious remaining resources can be spent elsewhere. That could be very good as well, assuming we spend wisely. I think we can afford to trade Swihart and Devers and maybe some mid-level pitchers like Johnson or Owens, but anything more, and we've gone too far towards the "now" (in my opinion).

I think DD has tried to walk the fine line, so far. He's made some big deals that I disagree with, but that made sense for the "win now" philosophy. He's kept all of our very best young talent, except for the highly speculative, very young Espinoza. My point about "getting out of hand" was geared more towards what DD will do this winter. Our extended future is on the fence right now.

Guerra was rated highly as well, and he was still rated 85th in one mid season ranking list despite his poor season .

Kimbrel has certainly made our pen much better, but had we not made the trade, we would have signed or traded for someone less expensive and not lost several prospects at the same time. Sure, the deal made us better right now, but have these? Miley for Smith (injured) and Elias (12.91 ERA) Wilkerson & Rijo for Aaron Hill (.512 OPS) Basabe & Almonte for Ziegler (1.263 WHIP, 43% Sv rate and 33% inherited runners scored- both worse than league averages) Espinoza for Pomeranz (has done well for us) Pat Light for Abad (5.00 ERA) The Pomeranz and Ziegler trades have made us better now, despite their troubles in a couple games, but I wouldn't say DD's trades have "looked pretty good". All trades and signings have to be taken into the context of what else was available and at what cost. Clearly, adding Price and Kimbrel have made us better in 2016. Carson Smith was likely to as well, and you can't blame DD for his injury, but you can't also say the trade has worked for us thus far either. I haven't given up on this year. Price and Kimbrel are both key elements of us having any chance at winning in Papi's final year. I get the win now philosophy. When you're rich, you can afford to take chances with the future knowing your fall back is always there- buy your way out of each mess created. I'm not sure one can argue that has worked out too well for us since the Crawford signing and Beckett extension. Relying on a strategy that has failed us miserably of late, is scary to me.

I'm not sure why Hernandez hasn't been given longer looks. I've always liked this kid, and I can't see how he'd be any worse than what our 3B tandem has done over the last 5-6 weeks.

Very true, but even those who don't should look around and see how many teams have won 3 championships in 15 years and currently have a great farm system. He's the best, even by modern standards.

MLBTR says the CWS tried to claim him, bur someone with a worse record had already done it. This means, if true, it was not the Red Sox.

If we only had a strong and deep pen that would allow us to yank starters after 5 or 6 innings... 8/30 6.2 IP 1 ER Lost 4-3 8/29 7.0 IP 3 ER Won 9-4 8/28 5.1 IP 2 ER Lost 10-4 8/27 8.0 IP 2 ER Won 8-3 8/26 5 ERs in the first innings against Wright (6 ER in 6-3 loss) 8/25 6.0 IP 1 ER Lost 2-1 8/24 7.1 IP 2 ER Lost 4-3 in 11 innings 8/23 9.0 IP 1 ER Won 2-1 8/22 8.1 IP 0 ER Won 6-2 8/21 10 runs let up in Owens start (lost 10-5) 8/19 6.1 IP 1 ER (9 IP 2 ER) Won 10-2 8/18 7.0 IP 1 ER Lost 4-3 8/17 6.0 IP 1 ER (shortened game) 8/16 6.1 IP 0 ER Won 8-1 8/15 7.1 IP 1 ER Won 5-3 8/14 7.2 IP 1 ER Won 3-2 8/13 9.0 IP 3 ER Won 6-3 8/12 8.2 IP 3 ER Won 9-4 8/11 7.0 IP 1 ER Lost 4-2 8/10 6.0 IP 1 ER Lost 9-4 8/09 8.2 ER 2 ER Won 5-3 Our rotation has looked pretty solid, at least for 5-7 IP.

We've come a long way from 2 straight last place finishes-- the Price signing, the Kimbrel trade and the Smith and Young acquisitions. This, a year after the two mega signings of HanRam and Pablo. We'll have some money to throw around this winter, but with the legend's shoes to fill and some serious bullpen rebuilding needed, it's going to be interesting to see how our resources are spent (or kept).

Pretty obvious. I just hope it doesn't get out of hand, and if does, we better win!

I didn't like the idea of a Hamels trade due to his near FA contractual cost. It just didn't make sense to me to trade many quality prospects for someone getting paid what he was owed. Why not just kick in $10M more and sign Scherzer? Surely $10M a year is worth less than Swihart and whatever they wanted. I was kind of surprised at how little Philly ended up getting, and it did make we wonder what was the minimum they'd have taken from us. Hamels has also pitched better than I expected post-trade. It's too late now, but would the White Sox have taken Espi, Swi and Devers for Quinatan or Sale? Would they have taken Espi, Guerra, Devers and Swi? Rumor was the CWs wanted JBJ. I wonder if they'd have taken an injured swi and JBJ for Sale. We'll probably will never know what the best offer might be for Swi, Devers, Johnson and Owens or Swi, Devers and ERod. Chances are, it wouldn't be enough for me to say yes, but I'm still curious.

I've never been afraid of trading prospects, as long as the deal is for a high quality player (usually a starting pitcher) and the player is under team control for several years at a reasonable cost. I did not like the Kimbrel trade due to Kimbrell's contract, his being a RP'er not a SP'er and the large bundle of prospects involved. The Pomeranz deal at least got us a SP'er, at a lower cost, and who is under team control for 2.3 years. I did not like the deal, because I think Espi is going to be incredible. I know it's just speculative value, but never the less, it's value. The Hill and Ziegler deals didn't cost any major prospects, but the accumulation of all that we've dealt away has gotten close to the critical mass tipping point. I do think our farm and future roster outlook could handle losing Devers (thanks to Moncada at 3B) and Swihart (with Leon's emergence and Vaz still in the fold) plus a couple fringe pieces, but we'd be right at the cusp of making a major sacrifice for the here and now. Keeping Moncada, Beni, Betts, Bogey and JBJ does not mean we'll need nothing elseg oing forward. Having low cost young players that produce well is what makes signing key FAs to fill major holes a winnable strategy. To me, the Pomeranz trade makes it hard to look for an ace this winter. Think of the level of pitcher we could have gotten with Espi, Swi and Devers vs just Devers and Swi. Any team looking to rebuild is not going to want Pomeranz more than Espi. I suppose the presence of Pomernaz could make trading ERod in the above package more palatable, but that would mean we traded our two best young pitchers (Espi & ERod) instead of just one. I'm still very excited about our future, but I am concerned about how far DD will go to "win now".

I'm not one to doubt the scouts, and he certainly could struggle a lot vs LHPs, but I'm just not sure if a "black hole" is a proper projection. I have said from the start, that he may only end up being used as a PR'er, PH'er vs RHPs and maybe a couple looks in the field in certain situations. Even a platoon might be pushing it, but if Shaw/Hill keeps struggling, then who knows...

I'm not sure how Swihart's injury affects his trade stock, but if he's not traded this winter, he'll have a shot at earning the catching job or back-up role. Vazquez still has weaknesses and Leon is still not a sure bet. If Swihart plays well, shows he's healthy and improves his defense, he should have a legitimate shot at a meaningful catcher role in 2017. That's three "ifs", but none are unreasonable. I guess if HanRam moves to DH next year, Swihart could try to win the 1B job. I think Beni and Young have LF covered pretty well. I really value Swihart a lot, and I have caught a lot of flack for saying since last year that we should look to trade him as part of a larger package for a very special pitcher.

A++

Well said. I just can't see Swihart beating out Vaz as the back-up catcher for Leon.