SRB

He had a 2.53 ERA and 11.4 K/9 after moving to the Dodgers last season... Is this just because people hate him as a former Cub? Obviously he shouldn't be the closer, and obviously they shouldn't give him much $, but he could help the bullpen. He also had 8 bb/9. Yes, which is why he's not an elite pitcher but merely a useful RP. If he had a normal BB/9 he would be one of the best pitchers in baseball. He has had a high BB/9 his entire career, that's just part of his skillset. Doesn't mean he can't be effective.

Why in the world would the Phillies make that deal? Given the going rate for free agent SP, Lee is probably underpriced.

He had a 2.53 ERA and 11.4 K/9 after moving to the Dodgers last season... Is this just because people hate him as a former Cub? Obviously he shouldn't be the closer, and obviously they shouldn't give him much $, but he could help the bullpen.

I would sign Marmol if he was cheap. His horribleness last year looks almost entirely due to a inexplicable spike in HR/9 over the first half of the season with the Cubs. His velocity is not down at all. Might be a good buy-low.

Saw one report saying the Angels turned down Skaggs for Trumbo (?!), and another suggesting that Trumbo has been being shopped for month(s) and that there isn't very much interest. Personally I want nothing to do with a sub-.300 OBP first baseman who is overrated enough to not come cheap. Although, better than Ike Davis I guess.

Trading Braun for prospects is crazy. Gomez, sure, but it would have to be a huge return.

I don't know, it sounds more to me like Blengino got fired and has an axe to grind and/or a personal grudge against Jack Z. Not that I have any stake in defending the latter who may be a huge jerk for all I know, just doesn't seem like hugely newsworthy behavior. What horrible moves has he made with the Mariners that suggest he no longer values statistics? A couple trades have not worked out very well, but it's not like he's been Dayton Moore. Plus who knows how much pressure he is getting from above. The last big signing the Mariners made that the stats community loved, Chone Figgins, was a debacle.

There are zero GMs in baseball who are stats guys. The question is whether they are willing to listen to stats guys below them or not, and it seems like Jack Z at least was, so I don't know what the big deal is really. Andrew Friedman isn't in his office coming up with statistical models either. I think Jack Z's success as Brewers scouting director is beyond dispute. I kind of wish we would go back to the "error" of drafting power hitters with no defense if the alternative is drafting disappointing/mediocre college pitchers every year.

He missed an entire season with a severe knee injury, I don't know if I'd call him anything close to a sure thing. He appears to have more upside than LoMo though.

I think inflation will level out again in a couple years. Aren't this year's deals fueled by the new TV revenue agreement, or whatever? I think he could maybe get between $350-$400 on a lifetime-type contract though (like 13+ years). A-Rod isn't directly comparable because he was an elite shortstop, Trout is not. *Edit* Also, Trout is clearly taking PEDs so if that gets discovered it's going to affect his value, obviously.

I wouldn't be surprised if playing for an organization he hates has played a role too. Change of scenery might do him wonders.

I admit that Gomez is a hard player to value, but I don't think that's a crazy proposal. If rival GMs think Gomez is even close to the 7.6 fWAR player he was last season, then he is a huge commodity. Three years of peak-year Gomez on a relatively cheap contract versus six years of a prospect?

Absolutely preposterous. In what world is Cano anywhere close to the same league as generational-type players like A-Rod or Pujols? These $200M+ contracts are such horrible ideas. *Edit* I mean, obviously the Pujols contract looks like a colossal error, but at least it is more understandable because Pujols is a no-doubt Hall of Fame player and nobody would have been surprised if he won another 3+ MVPs over the life of the contract (when it was signed). But Robinson Cano...? Huh?

[sarcasm]Melvin didn't trade Aoki for Ike Davis because we're already trading Braun for Ike Davis[/sarcasm]

This suggests they are pretty high on Khris Davis, no? Will Smith doesn't seem that exciting other than his amusing name, but this wasn't a bad trade. Especially if they think he can be a viable starter. Just take a look at the absurd money mediocre SP are getting on the free agent mark this year. You could easily replace Aoki multiple times over for the money it would take to sign a passable 24-year-old SP through free agency.

I don't disagree that last season was probably a down-year that he will rebound from, but if he was a free agent coming off an .819 OPS season (and remember, he is a 1B/DH with poor defense...) would you give him a $100M+ contract?? I think what's misleading about your comparison is that he wasn't that elite in 2012 either. I don't think he's been the type of player worth that kind of mega-deal since 2009. And given his age it's doubtful he's on the upward trajectory of his career. For what it's worth his BABIP last season was above his career average, so he wasn't just getting unlucky in that way. The bigger problem is that his BB% has been dropping every year for the last four years.

I love Prince, but I am almost as surprised by this trade as I was by the original contract Detroit gave him. That is just way too much money for what he brings to the table, I do not understand what these GMs are thinking. Texas is desperate for offense and this is a massive overpay for a 1B with a .819 OPS last season, who has been fairly inconsistent his entire career. Huge win for Detroit as they suddenly have an elite 2B and can move Cabrera back to 1B where he belongs. They're going to be really dangerous again next season.

Then in what scenario is it not obstruction after you have missed diving for a ball, as the rule clearly contemplates? Umpires got the rule wrong.

I agree that the only ambiguity is whether Middlebooks raising his legs could be interpreted as an attempt to obstruct the runner. However, it seems the umpires made it clear that this is not what they were calling when they emphasized that there is no intent requirement in the rule. They are totally wrong though: "If an infielder dives at a ground ball and the ball passes him and he continues to lie on the ground and delays the progress of the runner, he very likely has obstructed the runner." The use of the qualifier "very likely" clearly suggests that there are situations where the fielder has missed the ball (i.e. no longer in the act of fielding the ball) and yet he is NOT guilty of obstructing the runner. The strict liability interpretation advocated by the umpires and by many online is logically inconsistent with that language. Either the rule is written incorrectly, or there is an implied intent requirement such that "continues to lie on the ground" means a deliberate and opportunistic attempt to impede the runner, not an involuntary consequence of an attempt to field the ball. That is also the plain meaning of "and he continues," it suggests that the fielder is choosing to continue lying on the ground, not that he is on the ground as part of a fluid motion from his attempt to catch the ball. Furthermore, a strict liability interpretation is totally inconsistent with the rest of the rulebook -- for example, everybody knows a runner can obstruct a fielder turning a double play if he does so as part of a legitimate act of baserunning, whereas if he goes out of his way (with intent) to unnecessarily interfere with the fielder it is an out. Why would obstruction by the fielder be any different? Umpires botched it and have misinterpreted the rule. I don't blame them because that is a hard call to make in a split second, but they screwed up and are setting bad precedent with their defense of the call.

You could call that either way. Umpires decided to give the game for the Cardinals rather then letting more baseball be played. Not saying they are biased or that it was malicious but that's what happened. *Edit* Watching the replay this call was so wrong. I am baffled that the consensus seems to be the umpires got it correct. The rule is clearly written such that you are guilty of obstruction if you miss a catch and then continue to lie on the ground in an opportunistic way to impede the runner. Middlebrooks dove for the ball and in the same fluid motion (i.e. action) "obstructed" the runner (who then ran into/shoved Middlebrooks and prevented him from getting up). Not to mention Craig could have easily circumvented the "obstruction" if he had been watching where he was going and actually stayed on the chalk line rather than running on the inside edge of the base path. Umpires love the Holy Cardinals too, I guess.

Sad to see the Cardinals win. [sarcasm]I'm sure the Pirates will continue to be a playoff-caliber team though, given their reliance on breakout performances from their young stars this year, like A.J. Burnett, Francisco Liriano, Mark Melancon, Jason Grilli, and Russell Martin. Nowhere to go but up![/sarcasm]

[sarcasm]I told him the lies of a cheater were not welcome in my home and simply would not cut it, and demanded that he personally kiss my feet and mow my lawn. ...so he came over and did that but LEFT BEFORE TRIMMING THE EDGES! Why can't we have players with class, like St. Andy Pettitte?.[/sarcasm]

I think the whole "Capable of playing LF but not RF" mantra is overblown by scouting types who like to get lost in details. Yes, your arm is tested marginally more than in LF, but how many extra bases does Davis give up in a full season at RF than he would in LF? 10? I don't think the miniscule difference is enough to justify either not starting Davis or moving an MVP-caliber player (who has settled in fairly well in LF according to the eye-test).

To my best recollection, Maldy and Fiers didn't have the track record of success coming up that Davis and Scooter had. I think Fiers and Davis are pretty comparable. Unheralded prospects with excellent minor league numbers (Fiers's career line in the minors is 381.1 IP, 2.81 ERA, 1.036 WHIP, 9.6 K/9, 2.4 BB/9). The potentially huge difference being Fiers was way older than everyone at every level, so may have just been outsmarting hitters. I wouldn't say Scooter has had a lot of success either, with a .745 OPS in the minors (though Scooter has actually been heralded as a decent prospect). I think they are in a perfect position if they keep Aoki, because he is signed so cheaply and is a passable starting RF, so they can give the starting job to Davis but if he struggles can replace him with Aoki. Trading Aoki away is a mistake because if Davis has a rough spot you suddenly have a huge hole at a marquee offensive position and it starts turning into another disaster season.

I never said I believed he was innocent. I said I wouldn't claim to know either way until there was actual evidence on the table (such as an explicit statement like the one he made today), because a coerced suspension is not evidence of anything. I think the way A-Rod is being treated pretty much proved/proves my point. Clearly A-Rod believes there is insufficient evidence that he took anything illegal, so assuming Braun had been in the same situation and had not actually taken anything, do you think he would want to be in the position A-Rod is in right now? A-Rod is nearing the end of his career and has earned hundreds of millions of dollars, he can't afford to take a stand against MLB. Braun couldn't, so he accepted a suspension without even seeing the evidence they had on him - but it's the coercive threat of MLB that made him do that, not his actual guilt. Sorry that I don't "get it" though, and that I am primarily interested in watching baseball and rooting for the franchise player for the Milwaukee Brewers, rather than getting caught up in a manufactured moral controversy about "cheating" (which curiously doesn't exist for the NFL/Packers or any other sport...) coming straight from ESPN.