(11-08-2019 08:58 AM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  

(11-08-2019 08:48 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(11-08-2019 08:37 AM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  

(11-06-2019 03:18 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(11-06-2019 03:09 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  Do you think the FO will now be freed up to be aggressive in offering Rendon and Strasburg? Rendon supposedly already turned down 7/$210-$215MM. Getting under the threshold is only huge if your FO opens up the checkbook. Or so I've heard.

my hunch is we keep Stras and lose Rendon. Sucks because we don't have the incoming guy like we did last year with Robles.

Don’t you have Kieboom? He’s a far better hitter than Robles

He struggled so much this year that he didn't even get a September callup.

Also, he's more likely ticketed for 2b and not 3b, so not really replacing Rendon.

Forrest Whitley sucked too, but he's still the top pitching prospect on many lists. Kieboom had a 123 wRC+ in AAA at 21 years old. I'd say he's still a big part of their future plans. Also, why can't he play 3B?

I would guess they would play him at 2b over 3b. If we lose Rendon, could go out and get another 3b. Good 3b grow on trees more than good 2b.

(11-08-2019 09:06 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(11-08-2019 08:58 AM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  

(11-08-2019 08:48 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(11-08-2019 08:37 AM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  

(11-06-2019 03:18 PM)stever20 Wrote:  my hunch is we keep Stras and lose Rendon. Sucks because we don't have the incoming guy like we did last year with Robles.

Don’t you have Kieboom? He’s a far better hitter than Robles

He struggled so much this year that he didn't even get a September callup.

Also, he's more likely ticketed for 2b and not 3b, so not really replacing Rendon.

Forrest Whitley sucked too, but he's still the top pitching prospect on many lists. Kieboom had a 123 wRC+ in AAA at 21 years old. I'd say he's still a big part of their future plans. Also, why can't he play 3B?

I would guess they would play him at 2b over 3b. If we lose Rendon, could go out and get another 3b. Good 3b grow on trees more than good 2b.

you can't resign Kendrick and put Kieboom at 3B? Whatever position he plays, he's a non-SS replacement for Rendon. Obviously, he won't be as good as Rendon, but I don't see why he can't be as proportionally good as Robles was to Harper.

(11-08-2019 11:30 AM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  

(11-08-2019 09:06 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(11-08-2019 08:58 AM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  

(11-08-2019 08:48 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(11-08-2019 08:37 AM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  Don’t you have Kieboom? He’s a far better hitter than Robles

He struggled so much this year that he didn't even get a September callup.

Also, he's more likely ticketed for 2b and not 3b, so not really replacing Rendon.

Forrest Whitley sucked too, but he's still the top pitching prospect on many lists. Kieboom had a 123 wRC+ in AAA at 21 years old. I'd say he's still a big part of their future plans. Also, why can't he play 3B?

I would guess they would play him at 2b over 3b. If we lose Rendon, could go out and get another 3b. Good 3b grow on trees more than good 2b.

you can't resign Kendrick and put Kieboom at 3B? Whatever position he plays, he's a non-SS replacement for Rendon. Obviously, he won't be as good as Rendon, but I don't see why he can't be as proportionally good as Robles was to Harper.

Kendrick might not resign. May be too much $$$...

1 thing that will be interesting to watch next year will be the impact of the new rules...

lets look at 2 pretty good lefty hitters....

Bryce Harper for the season had about 31.2% of his PA's vs lefties.. but 7th inning on that number jumped up to 34.6%.
Juan Soto for the season had 33.5% of his PA's vs lefties. but 7th inning on that number jumped up to 42.2%.

high leverage situations- almost all obviously late innings....
Harper 47.1% of his pa's were vs lefties
Soto "only" 37% of his pa's were vs lefties

I think the LOOGY's being gone going to really impact things a lot. A guy like Harper isn't seeing 47% lefties in high leverage situations next year- just won't be possible.

I just think it’s kinda sad that right when stever finally figures out how to spell LOOGY they take the damned thing away. Huge missed opportunity.

lol...

so which way do you think we're going to go
lefty guys throwing to more righties?
righty guys throwing to more lefties?

Teams will use data from past games and place more value on middle relievers who are effective at getting out both lefty and righty batters.

But, I wouldn't be too sure that LOOGYs will disappear completely. We will still see managers bringing in a pitcher with two outs and the intent of pitching to only one batter. Maybe even, for example, bringing in a lefty reliever with one out if the next two batters are lefties.

IMO, the new rule should be tweaked to allow a team to replace a pitcher, even if he hasn't pitched to 3 batters or to the end of a half inning, if the opposing team pinch hits before the pitcher has reached the minimum number of batters faced.

(11-10-2019 12:53 AM)Wedge Wrote:  Teams will use data from past games and place more value on middle relievers who are effective at getting out both lefty and righty batters.

But, I wouldn't be too sure that LOOGYs will disappear completely. We will still see managers bringing in a pitcher with two outs and the intent of pitching to only one batter. Maybe even, for example, bringing in a lefty reliever with one out if the next two batters are lefties.

IMO, the new rule should be tweaked to allow a team to replace a pitcher, even if he hasn't pitched to 3 batters or to the end of a half inning, if the opposing team pinch hits before the pitcher has reached the minimum number of batters faced.

I think the problem though with what you're suggesting with the LOOGY's is that if they do allow that lefty to get on base- he's going to have to face a righty next...

I think it's so comical with Nats fans who think its going to be so automatic that Soto will be willing to do an extension right now.......

I think they should be watching what Bellinger does..... any word Brookes on if he's going to do an extension, or just go year to year with arbitration?

(11-12-2019 01:26 PM)stever20 Wrote:  I think it's so comical with Nats fans who think its going to be so automatic that Soto will be willing to do an extension right now.......

I think they should be watching what Bellinger does..... any word Brookes on if he's going to do an extension, or just go year to year with arbitration?

There is not a word of him getting an extension. Everybody assuming it'll be arbitration.

ETA: But if he has another big year in 2020 I wouldn't be surprised if an extension is on the table.

(11-12-2019 01:43 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  

(11-12-2019 01:26 PM)stever20 Wrote:  I think it's so comical with Nats fans who think its going to be so automatic that Soto will be willing to do an extension right now.......

I think they should be watching what Bellinger does..... any word Brookes on if he's going to do an extension, or just go year to year with arbitration?

There is not a word of him getting an extension. Everybody assuming it'll be arbitration.

ETA: But if he has another big year in 2020 I wouldn't be surprised if an extension is on the table.

after next year, would he even be willing to go that route? Saw his estimated this year is 11.6 million, and you figure next year that'd get up quite a bit. Betts in his next to last year of Aribtration got 20 million and is projected to get 27.7 million this year. So that's 47.7 million just in the last 2 years before free agency- and then add in the year in between for at least 15.3 million and it takes it up to 63 million in the last 3 years of Arbitration. Going to be a very costly extension for sure....

(11-12-2019 02:18 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(11-12-2019 01:43 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  

(11-12-2019 01:26 PM)stever20 Wrote:  I think it's so comical with Nats fans who think its going to be so automatic that Soto will be willing to do an extension right now.......

I think they should be watching what Bellinger does..... any word Brookes on if he's going to do an extension, or just go year to year with arbitration?

There is not a word of him getting an extension. Everybody assuming it'll be arbitration.

ETA: But if he has another big year in 2020 I wouldn't be surprised if an extension is on the table.

after next year, would he even be willing to go that route? Saw his estimated this year is 11.6 million, and you figure next year that'd get up quite a bit. Betts in his next to last year of Aribtration got 20 million and is projected to get 27.7 million this year. So that's 47.7 million just in the last 2 years before free agency- and then add in the year in between for at least 15.3 million and it takes it up to 63 million in the last 3 years of Arbitration. Going to be a very costly extension for sure....

Yeah - this year would be the much more cost effective year to do that but: 1) It's only his first year of arb, 2) I don't think Friedman is willing to place the bet on him, and 3) It's definitely wishful thinking but if the Dodgers think they need to chase big FAs this offseason they surely don't need to add any more to Bellinger's pay right now. And for what it's worth, the Dodgers have avoided arbitration pretty effectively during Friedman's tenure (may entirely?). Being friendly negotiators keeps relationships with players good and at least gives the team a little better stance when negotiating extensions or FA deals.

I guess I'm suggesting a Mike Trout approach. Trouble with that, among other things, is that Scott Boras is Bellinger's agent. But if 2020 confirms his 2019, this guy is going to be a perennial MVP candidate. Get him before he gets on the open market? Hope he's more interested in LA and security than big paydays? What am I saying - I can't even help scoffing as I type this.

(11-12-2019 03:18 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  

(11-12-2019 02:18 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(11-12-2019 01:43 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  

(11-12-2019 01:26 PM)stever20 Wrote:  I think it's so comical with Nats fans who think its going to be so automatic that Soto will be willing to do an extension right now.......

I think they should be watching what Bellinger does..... any word Brookes on if he's going to do an extension, or just go year to year with arbitration?

There is not a word of him getting an extension. Everybody assuming it'll be arbitration.

ETA: But if he has another big year in 2020 I wouldn't be surprised if an extension is on the table.

after next year, would he even be willing to go that route? Saw his estimated this year is 11.6 million, and you figure next year that'd get up quite a bit. Betts in his next to last year of Aribtration got 20 million and is projected to get 27.7 million this year. So that's 47.7 million just in the last 2 years before free agency- and then add in the year in between for at least 15.3 million and it takes it up to 63 million in the last 3 years of Arbitration. Going to be a very costly extension for sure....

Yeah - this year would be the much more cost effective year to do that but: 1) It's only his first year of arb, 2) I don't think Friedman is willing to place the bet on him, and 3) It's definitely wishful thinking but if the Dodgers think they need to chase big FAs this offseason they surely don't need to add any more to Bellinger's pay right now. And for what it's worth, the Dodgers have avoided arbitration pretty effectively during Friedman's tenure (may entirely?). Being friendly negotiators keeps relationships with players good and at least gives the team a little better stance when negotiating extensions or FA deals.

I guess I'm suggesting a Mike Trout approach. Trouble with that, among other things, is that Scott Boras is Bellinger's agent. But if 2020 confirms his 2019, this guy is going to be a perennial MVP candidate. Get him before he gets on the open market? Hope he's more interested in LA and security than big paydays? What am I saying - I can't even help scoffing as I type this.

Boras is his agent? Yeah, he isn't signing an extension before hitting the open market....

Also with Boras as his agent, wonder if he's going to be more willing to actually go to arbitration to set the market... Esp since he's got Soto right on the heels....

Quote:Four people who were with the Astros in 2017, including pitcher Mike Fiers, said that during that season, the Astros stole signs during home games in real time with the aid of a camera positioned in the outfield.

Now, an MLB investigation into the Astros’ culture in the wake of the team’s firing of assistant general manager Brandon Taubman could be expanded to determine who in the organization was aware of the sign-stealing practice — and whether it continued or evolved in subsequent seasons. The Athletic’s confirmation of rule-breaking by Houston is limited to 2017.

“Beginning in the 2017 season, numerous Clubs expressed general concerns that other Clubs were stealing their signs,” MLB said in a statement. “As a result of those concerns, and after receiving extensive input from the General Managers, we issued a revised policy on sign stealing prior to the 2019 season. We also put in place detailed protocols and procedures to provide comfort to Clubs that other Clubs were not using video during the game to decode and steal signs. After we review this new information we will determine any necessary next steps.”

The Astros declined to comment at this time.

(11-12-2019 03:58 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

Quote:Four people who were with the Astros in 2017, including pitcher Mike Fiers, said that during that season, the Astros stole signs during home games in real time with the aid of a camera positioned in the outfield.

Now, an MLB investigation into the Astros’ culture in the wake of the team’s firing of assistant general manager Brandon Taubman could be expanded to determine who in the organization was aware of the sign-stealing practice — and whether it continued or evolved in subsequent seasons. The Athletic’s confirmation of rule-breaking by Houston is limited to 2017.

“Beginning in the 2017 season, numerous Clubs expressed general concerns that other Clubs were stealing their signs,” MLB said in a statement. “As a result of those concerns, and after receiving extensive input from the General Managers, we issued a revised policy on sign stealing prior to the 2019 season. We also put in place detailed protocols and procedures to provide comfort to Clubs that other Clubs were not using video during the game to decode and steal signs. After we review this new information we will determine any necessary next steps.”

The Astros declined to comment at this time.

Two thoughts:
1) Is there any doubt who the investigation will identify as the responsible party?
2) Now I can finally rest easy about the WS. Definitely sign stealing beat the Dodgers.

Video of the incident in the White Sox game at Minute Maid Park that is discussed in the article in The Athletic, showing that after the last "bang", at about 1:33 in this video clip, Danny Farquhar steps off the mound to talk to the catcher.

(11-12-2019 03:47 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(11-12-2019 03:18 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  

(11-12-2019 02:18 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(11-12-2019 01:43 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  

(11-12-2019 01:26 PM)stever20 Wrote:  I think it's so comical with Nats fans who think its going to be so automatic that Soto will be willing to do an extension right now.......

I think they should be watching what Bellinger does..... any word Brookes on if he's going to do an extension, or just go year to year with arbitration?

There is not a word of him getting an extension. Everybody assuming it'll be arbitration.

ETA: But if he has another big year in 2020 I wouldn't be surprised if an extension is on the table.

after next year, would he even be willing to go that route? Saw his estimated this year is 11.6 million, and you figure next year that'd get up quite a bit. Betts in his next to last year of Aribtration got 20 million and is projected to get 27.7 million this year. So that's 47.7 million just in the last 2 years before free agency- and then add in the year in between for at least 15.3 million and it takes it up to 63 million in the last 3 years of Arbitration. Going to be a very costly extension for sure....

Yeah - this year would be the much more cost effective year to do that but: 1) It's only his first year of arb, 2) I don't think Friedman is willing to place the bet on him, and 3) It's definitely wishful thinking but if the Dodgers think they need to chase big FAs this offseason they surely don't need to add any more to Bellinger's pay right now. And for what it's worth, the Dodgers have avoided arbitration pretty effectively during Friedman's tenure (may entirely?). Being friendly negotiators keeps relationships with players good and at least gives the team a little better stance when negotiating extensions or FA deals.

I guess I'm suggesting a Mike Trout approach. Trouble with that, among other things, is that Scott Boras is Bellinger's agent. But if 2020 confirms his 2019, this guy is going to be a perennial MVP candidate. Get him before he gets on the open market? Hope he's more interested in LA and security than big paydays? What am I saying - I can't even help scoffing as I type this.

Boras is his agent? Yeah, he isn't signing an extension before hitting the open market....

Also with Boras as his agent, wonder if he's going to be more willing to actually go to arbitration to set the market... Esp since he's got Soto right on the heels....

The only time a Boras client extended that I know of was Cargo with the Rockies a few years back.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

(11-12-2019 10:20 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

On the one hand, kind of makes sense because Kapler was with Dodgers while Zaidi was there and he was a finalist for the manager job with Roberts. But Kapler's handling/mishandling of the sexual assault incident has to be concerning for Giants fans. I assume there will be lots of questions for Zaidi about Kapler (and about his own role in addressing that incident). Lots of denials and vague answers coming, I'd guess.

ETA: This hire in any city should receive a lot of scrutiny, but I'd guess it'll be particularly sharp in San Francisco. Even if Kapler starts winning I'm not sure it'll smooth things out entirely but if the losing continues Zaidi will be on terribly thin ice.

It's interesting that with both the Giants and the Padres, the front office exec decided that having his hand-picked guy as manager was so important that he was willing to bet his own job on it.

Maybe not as big a deal for the Padres, because if the Padres don't win soon, Preller is gone no matter who the manager is. Zaidi, on the other hand, could have survived one failed manager in SF if he hadn't made a hire that is both questionable and closely tied to himself.