LouisEly

I posted pretty much these points in the Agent39 thread in the minor league forum without seeing this post first. The installation of additional penalties for going over the soft cap creates additional risk for signing high-priced free agents to long term guaranteed contracts. Additional risk needs to be mitigated to have the same expected result. Teams don't want to be saddled with the next Josh Hamilton, Carl Crawford, Pablo Sandoval, Albert Pujols, etc., contracts. Jayson Werth wasn't worth the last three years of his deal. The owners are starting to understand that players sustaining performance into their late 30's was more of a function of PEDs and not ability. Analytics are showing that players begin to decline in their early/mid-30s and that long-term contracts into a player's late 30's are a poor investment. If analytics are showing that... how do you argue? If players want these long-term deals, they have to include opt-out clauses... for both the players, and the teams.

Josh, to what extent might this be a function of the financial rules of the game changing? With the installation of additional penalties for going over the soft salary cap comes additional risk to teams if high salary players become injured or perform poorly because the salaries are guaranteed. Teams don't want to be saddled with the next Josh Hamilton contract, or the next Carl Crawford contract, or the next Pablo Sandoval contract, or the next Albert Pujols contract, etc., because those guys flame out long before their contract is up. Teams are understanding that players performing well into their late 30's was more of a function of PEDs than natural ability, and analytics are showing that performance starts dropping off in the mid-30's. If analytics are showing that long-term guaranteed contracts, especially those that go into a player's late 30's, are a bad investment... how do you argue with that? It sounds like (maybe it's fact, maybe it's fiction) these guys have contract offers but are pushing for additional years.

McCarthy has historically been unwilling to let coaches who are under contract interview with other teams. Van Pelt wanted to pursue OC opportunities. I say let them pursue promotions, and if they are under contract then ask for draft pick compensation for hiring them.

Houser, like Taylor Williams last year, will need a year to rebuild his arm strength. He will likely be in the minors, maybe even at AA, and like Williams may start games with pitch counts limits for the first couple of months. I would be surprised if there isn't some type of limit put on his usage; being a full starter without limits next year is highly unlikely.

The Orioles have decided organizationally to not undergo the expense of international scouting. I can't blame them - really risky to give seven figures to 16-year-olds. Seems like many of the big bonus babies (other than the REALLY big bonus babies) never make it, and I'm referring to more than Lara. Looking back at some of the big signings from 7-9 years ago, many of them haven't amounted to anything.

The interview on Golic & Wingo made it sound like he was not all too happy. I know there will be a crowd that just says he has no business in coaching decisions but it still could create a rift between Rodgers and management. It's the QB coach's responsibility to develop the QBs and have them ready to play. Hundley's performance is on Van Pelt as much if not more than McCarthy, and that's probably why Van Pelt was let go.

I'm pretty sure I can find at least a dozen PAs a year where Braun looks lost at the plate.

I thought you cut the cord, but if you have cable and the Universal HD channel they replay both RAW and Smackdown on Saturday nights back to back at least twice each. It's literally their entire Saturday night programming.

I don't know that it was Brinson's K rate as much as it was that his success in the minors was built on incredibly high BABIPs and that he is RH in a RH-dominant lineup. Like others have said, Yelich is what we hope Brinson can become. I don't think they thought Brinson was horrible; it's just that they didn't think he had as high of a ceiling as some of the Top 100 Prospect compilers. Brewers likely had him at #4 or #5 in their org with a B grade.

It would take more than Domingo and Burnes! Then I hope we are out. Archer is not our TOR guy we need, #2 maybe, but #3 is more likely where he SHOULD fit. I have no interest in trading Burnes or Peralta, please, keep the arms on the farm. Tampa has no urgency behind trading Archer. They can wait it out and ask what they want. Barring injury, he will likely be just as valuable at the trade deadline as he is now.

This is what I have been saying for some time. As I've said before, I think this is why it was so easy to acquire Brinson in the first place, and why I was against drafting Ray at #5. OFs can be had for cheap because of oversupply.

RE: projections. All projections are based on models. There is an old saying in market research: "All models are wrong but some are useful."

Yes. We added a relief pitcher named Matt Albers. Doesn't change the value of susac 1 bit. All it means is that Albers was deemed more valuable than Susac and that Bandy and Nottingham were deemed more valuable than Susac. He looked like Ben Sheets at the plate, so I am not losing any sleep over this move. Honestly, I think Susac is the worst position player I have ever watched in the major leagues. Based on all 12 plate appearances this past season? [sarcasm]Sure looked horrible in his 17 plate appearances in 2016.[/sarcasm] 250 career plate appearances and a career OPS+ of 91. Not terrible for a catcher at all.

Anyone else surprised that Tobias Harris is only 25 years old?

Yeah, that's horse manure. Here are the "DHs" (according to B-R) for each AL team: BOS: Hanley Ramirez - .750 (no starter w/an OPS anywhere near Santana's .875) NYY: Matt Holiday - .748 (Judge only one significantly greater than Santana, Sanchez was .876) TBR: Lucas Duda - .729 (no starter > Santana) TOR: Kendrys Morales - .753 (Donaldson - .908 - and Smoak - .883, if you believe that will be normal for Smoak) BAL: Mark Trumbo - .686 (no one > Santana) CLE: Edwin Encarnacion - .881 MIN: Robbie Grossman (who?) - .741 (both Dozier and Sano slightly lower than Santana) KCR: Brandon Moss - .707 (Hosmer .882) CHW: Matt Davidson - .711 (Abreu - .906, Avasail Garcia - .885) DET: Victor Martinez - .697 (Justin Upton, but now on LAA) HOU: Beltran (.666)/Gattis (.767) - (Altuve, Correa, Gonzalez, Springer... ) LAA: Albert Pujols - LOL (Trout, Justin Upton) SEA: Nelson Cruz - .924 (no one else > Santana) TEX: Shin-Soo Choo - .780 (Beltre - .919) OAK: Ryon Healy - .754 If Santana were a DH in the AL, he'd be the third best DH in terms of OPS and no one else is even close. Other than Cruz and Encarnacion, who are "winning players" on that list? This brings me to my surprise suitor - the Boston Red Sox. The Red Sox could easily cut bait with Hanley Ramirez, and they don't want to start him in 2018 anyway because of his vesting option (1050 plate appearances between 2017 and 2018). If he gets that (497 PAs in 2018), the Red Sox are on the hook for $22M in 2019. Even if Santana gets ~$8M in Arby-1 in 2019, trading for Santana and benching/cutting Ramirez will save the Red Sox $14M in 2019. And they have to keep up with the Yankees. I would have to think the Red Sox would be very motivated to bring someone in and bench or cut Ramirez. Saving $14M in 2019 plus the upgrade in production could entice them to give up Groome + another piece (Darwinzon Hernandez), or a three player deal (Houck, Scherff, Hernandez).

https://www.minorleagueball.com/2018/1/26/16938286/baltimore-orioles-top-20-prospects-for-2018 I liked their 1st (DL Hall) and 2nd (Adam Hall) round draft picks last year. Long way off, lots of risk, so that has to be discounted in their value. Hunter Harvey has injury risks, and needs to start being protected on the 40 after next season, so that discounts his value. Should be able to get two of those three plus another C-type prospect. They may or may not have a need. They have a young star of their own in Trey Mancini in LF who was a 1B in the minors (Davis is under contract through 2022). Austin Hays probably needs another year in the minors, but he likely takes over for Adam Jones in CF as Jones is a FA after next season. They're on the hook for Trumbo as DH for the next two seasons though. Maybe they ride with Santana in RF for two years until Trumbo is gone, then can fill RF with Santander/Mullins/Stewart.

HH said that the trade fell through because that team wanted the Brewers to take on too much of the contract.

I also think that this and other moves signal that Stearns and his analytics team think that OF defense/range is undervalued in the market. Replacing Santana with Yelich, signing Cain, drafting athletic OFs in the 1st round three years in a row (Grisham, Ray, Lutz - who played CF this past year). Yeah, they gave up an athletic OF in Brinson but replaced him with two.

Based on what we heard from HighHeat, it could have been the Brewers exploring what they could get for Santana ("doing their homework") prior to making a serious offer for Yelich. The Brewers could have been the hesitant party, as they didn't want to actually trade Santana until they knew they could get Yelich and knew what it would cost. As HighHeat said, Yelich was A, signing Cain was B, and trading Santana was C.

I get that overall Yelich is a better player than Santana, that MIL is a more offensive-friendly park than MIA, and that Santana is limited defensively. But let's not forget that Santana 1) bested Yelich in OPS last year by a wide margin (.875 to ..807) and 2) is still pre-arb for another season. Santana was a 3.3 fWAR/3.0 bWAR player last year, and someone will get ~3 WAR for about $600K this season. Also, typically players don't get full value their first year of arby, so he will likely not get an 8-figure contract in 2019. Santana will fetch value. Getting 3 WAR for $600K this year is an incredible value, and he will likely be a bargain in 2019 as well.

28-year-old's with career 10.5 K/9 and 3.56 FIP who are pre-arb and don't cost eight figures don't grow on trees (and rarely are available). He was injured - on the DL from June 4 to July 22. Likely pitched hurt before going on the DL, thus the poor results.

I think everybody hates things that they don't like. Except for things they are indifferent about.

Sneed had a 6 ERA in the minors last year. He's not even among the top 30 prospects for the Astros. What does the Astros wanting to dump Villar for pennies and Sneed being those pennies have to do with Sneed's actual value now? It shows that prospects can be overrated and sometimes should be traded.

A couple of small problems trwi7: 1) You have 12 guys on your list, not 11 B) If you dump the guys you say you will dump, you will only have one backup 2B/3B/SS on the 40. No one to call up in case of injury. 3) If you get rid of two catchers, Nottingham is the only backup on the 40 (and he is nowhere near ready yet). 4) If you trade Broxton you might have to add that player to the 40. We also have significantly different views on the value of Pennington and Wilkerson. I strongly disagree with the notion that those guys will be given away for nothing. I also think Perrin has value as a cheap 5th starter. Other than that, you're spot on...