Thurston Fluff

I think Lara not being on the 40 man hurts his chances somewhat. Not just because it'd take up a spot but it would also use up an option when he gets sent back down. Not sure it's worth it for what would probably be a handful of games and maybe a start or two. If Lockridge was gone for the year then it might make more sense.

I guess I define dominant overpowering pitcher differently than you do. I define it as someone who can dominate and overpower a hitter in the sense that the hitter has little to no chance of hitting the pitch. If all you mean is he throws a lot harder than any pitcher we've had then yes he does. Though Woody and Burnes weren't exactly soft tossers either. If you go by how hard it is to get a hit off him then there isn't as much daylight between them. Why would how hard they throw be the determining factor for dominance though?

The Brewers history involve Burnes and Woody. Wouldn't the next level from that be all time great like Nolan Ryan? I never said he isn't worthwhile. I said his contract has been a wash so far from what it would have been had he not signed the contract. The contract may end up being better, or worse if he has more health issues, but so far it's been a wash compared to what we would have got had we just went year to year.

Ashby is making $5.5 million this year. That's not cheap for a reliever who isn't a closer. I'm not saying he isn't worth it nor that he isn't valauble to the team. But his overall contract is a wash because of the shoulder surgery. Pitchers are more prone to injuries which increases the risk for long term contracts. Even team friendly ones. I'm not totally against them. I just think they have to be very friendly and would prefer to do them with position players due to the added injury risk. I didn't say we could get another Miz for pennies on the dollar. I said we can develop starting pitching for pennies on the dollar. That said, is Miz all that much better than Woody or Burnes? Lets wait a while before we declare him the next Nolan Ryan. I don't know if we're all that great at developing position players considering our offense is pretty average and a lot of our current key players weren't developed by us. WE certainly have a better reputation of developing pitching. Finally, I said let someone else pay hundreds of millions for him in his 30's. He's 24 years old now and is in his first year control wise. We have control over him until he's 30. I say trade him at 29 and let someone else pay hundreds of millions to have surgery in his 30's rather than pay him a couple years into his 30's.

The risk is his first decade could look more like Noah Syndergaard's than De Grom. I don't mind locking up young players to team friendly contracts but I'd prefer they focus on position players. It worked out well for Peralta but it was a wash with Ashby (Nothing against Ashby. He's a great asset but he's not cheap for a reliever and he missed a lot of time.) We're also pretty good at developing pitchers. Why waste limited resources on an area we can replenish for penny on the dollar? There's a lot of risk for pitchers in general. That risk goes up with guys who throw that hard. If he stay healthy I'll be happy watching him pitch for the next five years and get something for him before he hits free agency. Let another team pay hundreds of millions for him to have elbow surgery at 30.

I was curious if Black was going to be the odd man out. I'm glad he's not. Perkins is a nice luxury to have as the fifth outfielder when the offense is clicking but that's not the case right now.

He was going to be playing in spring training either way. It could have happened in a regular spring game just as easily.

There is likely going to be a lockout after the world series. Even if there isn't they won't need a 40 man spot until they need to add players in danger of being being selected in the rule five draft or they want to sign a free agent. Neither of which happens the day after the World Series. They're going to free up some spots for players who's contracts are up. There are also several other players on the 40 man who would be let go before a possible high leverage reliever would. Akil Baddo, Blake Perkins and Gregg Jones are three off the top of my head. The 40 man roster isn't going to be the reason they don't offer arbitration if they think he's going to be productive after he comes back from surgery in normal years let alone one where they'll be waiting to see what happens with an entirely new CBA.

It isn't a forgone conclusion they won't offer him arbitration even if he does have surgery on his elbow. He's only going to cost a 40 man spot until he can be placed on the 60 day DL and there's no telling what's going to happen after the season is over given the current agreement with the players is up. When all that is sorted out we might have a clearer picture of whether it was a bust or not. Even then, only if he's not on the roster. If he's still here then we'll have to see how well he does to determine if it was a worthwhile trade or not.

DFA?

I'm not nearly as good at it as you are but from what I've seen in the quality of defense over the same period has gone up. If there's an inverse effect going on it could be the emphasis on defense is part of the reason for the trend in lower offense. Then again better analysis leads to better positioning, which leads the same defender having better results. I don't know how one could isolate prioritizing player type as a cause. What I do think is happening is teams are starting to prioritize defense more. That alone would presumably have teams drafting and developing a player type that leads to more defense at the possible cost of offense.

He should not be in any high leverage role for sure. I wouldn't be opposed to optioning him now. I still think he could end up being a good pitcher for us but we can't be blowing games late because he might turn it around.

You think putting a guy with a career minor league OPS of .720 is a better option for a struggling offense than a guy who has a career minor league OPS of .839? I get he's off to a hot start but he's only had 25 games above AA and he had a 712 OPS in AA last season. He has a high floor with his defense but why risk his development based on 25 games?

I think it has more to do with wanting to get more offensive production. It doesn't hurt to have the open spot but I don't think it was done to open a spot for a future move.

Black is one of those guys I've always liked for no discernible reason. Hope this time he gets enough regular ab's to show he belongs. I'm also interested to see what Drohan does in the pen. I think he might have a better future there than the rotation.