KeithStone53151

Nelson, Chacin, Anderson, Davies, and Burnes is the way I see it. Woodruff should remain in the bullpen with Peralta being the first guy up when needed. I agree, I think this is the default. There is of course the chance that Woodruff or Peralta have a crazy good spring and win a job over Burnes or Davies...but I would anticipate this being the expectation. Peralta will probably throw like 80% changeups if he goes to AAA to get that pitch ready.

The more I see, the less chance I think there is that Nelson is anything but an established member of the rotation. I expect him to be the opening day starter, and to enter the season with virtually no restrictions. If I'm wrong, so be it...that's what I'm expecting though.

+1. Not only that, they have elite performers at both positions. It's not like they aren't signing him because they have Jordy Mercer holding down SS.

It actually is up right now, I think it just popped up. http://m.mlb.com/prospects/2019/?list=mil

Yah, but are those 54 innings really spread out over 12-15 guys? No, probably not. Especially considering the Brewers often time pulled guys early to go to premium relievers. Not like guys were getting lit up and Eric Sogard was pitching. Spread that around to 5 guys or so and we are talking a workload increase over 10%. It's fair to assume they'll be spread over 12-15 guys, just not necessarily evenly. I would actually think the best relievers wouldn't pick up much of that slack, they are going to pitch in winning games regardless. Rarely are the top guys going to come in to eat innings in the 5th-6th. It will be the Guerra/Williams/Barnes/Suter types that are more likely eat those extra 54 innings. If the Brewers are winning 5-2 and the starter is at 80+ pitches through 4 innings, yeah he might get pulled after 5 or at some point in the 5th. It's not like Hader/Jeffress/Knebel are going to be expected to nail down 4+ innings. They'll pitch 2 or 3 max, with other arms picking up the other innings. Remember, this isn't September/October baseball. We will win plenty of games without our top relievers pitching. That's especially likely considering the offense we'll be putting on the field.

Josh Harrison will very very likely be playing for a contender in August/September...and that contender will not be the Tigers.

I haven't found any details yet.

This is also a heck of an offer, if true. Those options I would assume include substantial buyouts. So the guarantee is probably pretty good.

I think many are underestimating the Padres lineup. They had a number of young guys getting their feet wet in the outfield last year. They have a couple good/intrguing arms in their rotation, while most of their best prospects are pitchers...and at least a couple will be in the AAA/MLB conversation. Add all that to Myers/Hosmer...established talents. They look like they could be very good this year...probably better in the 2nd half than the 1st half. And again, it's incremental increases. As of now, I would easily project the Padres to finish 2nd in the division in 2020...and potentially contend for 1st with the Dodgers.

Your expectations of teams/owners are wildly ridiculous and fantasy land. It's not worth having a serious conversation with you.

How is this guy an agent? His default response to anyone who disagrees with him is "moron". And then throw some expletives in there. I think I would be embarrassed if I was one of his clients. I wonder if whoever employs him notices stuff like that. His twitter is incredibly toxic, but at the same time I can't bring myself to not look at it. It's toxic but so interesting. Maybe he's actually a genius...

I'll agree this is far better than him going to the Cubs/Dodgers/Phillies THIS YEAR, but it would have be nice to saddle the cubs with another trash contract in 5 years when MM is bad. And I also don't know that the Padres can't compete this year. They have so much young talent that could arrive this year, along with a few strong/established players.

I've seen on twitter, Padres GM saying no deal is done. White Sox seem baffled in that they thought they were the high offer on the table. I guess I'm not 100% certain the drama is over with MM's free agency. Also if MM truly gets $300M, what will Harper get? Have to believe he'll be $1-2 million more per year and possibly an 11th year?

I can't wait to see on March 28th, MM lazily jog to first on a grounder in the hole between SS and 3b and get out by half a step. Congrats Padres!

Thank you both. Glad I could find some sanity.

How exactly does this signing prove collusion? Or that the players are getting screwed? I don't understand this guy.

If the risk is too great in owning the team, then the owner should sell and invest in something more stable like treasury bonds. Wow, what a ridiculous comment. No less ridiculous than Josh's twitter. How about it's their business and they run it how they want? Because, ya know...its theirs. Not yours, but theirs. They are putting their money at risk to turn a profit, just like every other joe schmo that has extra money to invest. Except for you I guess, you probably take on significant risk and just hope to break even right?

I thought #2 was just as interesting. All this talk about all these great free agents left. Well, not really. https://www.mlb.com/news/2019-mlb-free-agents/c-293292274 So by fWAR- SS - Manny Machado (6.2) SP - Dallas Keuchel (3.6) - mediocre strikeout numbers pushes his value down in the current MLB climate RF - Bryce Harper (3.5) SS - Jose Iglesias (2.5) - nearly all his value comes with the glove, below-average bat with a career .270/.315/.363/.678 slash line 3B - Mike Moustakas (2.4) SP - Gio Gonzalez (2.0) SP - Clay Buchholz (1.9) - starting pitcher that has averaged 90 innings over the last four years RF - Carlos Gonzalez (1.7) - .243/.301/.374/.675 on the road from 2016-2018 LF - Marwin Gonzalez (1.6) - lifetime .264/.318/.419/.737 and that includes the out-of-character 2017 numbers, mediocre glove for most positions other than LF and the bat plays down there LF - Denard Span (1.5) RP - Craig Kimbral (1.5) RF - Jose Bautista (1.0) - way up there in age Only 6 left that posted a WAR of 2+ last year and only 12 left that posted a WAR of 1+ last year. I find it a bit weird that Iglesias doesn't have a job. Unless he is specifically insisting on a starting SS job, he seems like he'd be an excellent utility guy. I can't imagine him not being a plus defender at 3 infield spots. I also still think Marwin Gonzalez gets a fairly surpringly large contract. It overall sounds like things may be wrapping up for the big 2 shortly. Why has there been such minimal chatter on Kimbrel. I've heard next to nothing on him, and can't think of a single team that's even involved in bidding for him. I know he had a bad month or two last year, but he's still a high end reliever.

I wouldn't want GG even on a minor league deal. I don't want to risk him looking slightly better than mediocre in ST and taking a rotation spot from Burnes/Woodruff/Peralta trio. I believe in our young arms and don't want some mediocre retread getting starts ahead of those guys.

This issue seemed like almost a daily occurence under Yost's tenure. So often a SP would go 6 decent innings and melt down in the 7th. Maybe I have a selective memory about this.

That's another reason fans typically side with management in sports labor disputes. The fans have no idea how much the owners are making. They do, however, know how much each player makes. One thought I had, what do you all think the bottom line looks like? Do you think there's more than $30 million at the bottom line? The owners have so many millions at risk. I know the franchise values are appreciating like crazy right now, but that might not last forever. They still have a ton at risk and many franchises may not have $30 million in profit in a given year...which is notable because a handful of players/employees would then make more than the owner(s). I know it's easy to say "rich greedy billionaires", but there's so much risk to owning a sports franchise. What if for example, the NFL concussion issue causes interest in football to wane over the next 10-20 years? Those owners could be out hundreds of millions.

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2019/02/mike-moustakas-could-play-second-base-for-brewers.html This article questions why we'd pay Moustakas more than the $9 million that Brian Dozier got. Ummmm Moustakas is better......? At least with the bat.

Bill Hall, all of that is very well thought out. I see a lot of partial arguments posted in here. I've been super critical of Josh's arguments and the players general argument...as their argument is terrible. But that doesn't mean they are entirely wrong. There are 3 sides at play here. Players, high revenue clubs, and low revenue clubs. Finding a happy medium for all 3 sides will not be easy. It's really easy to say "well teams see how these long deals work out and aren't doing them". While true, not signing those long term deals eats away at players revenues as a whole...and that's not exactly fair as league-wide revenue keeps increasing. You can say "well then let's pay players more money sooner or let them reach free agency sooner". Well then there goes competitive balance for small market clubs. You can say "well let's expand revenue sharing". I'm sure high revenue clubs will be lining up to increase revenue sharing so teams like Miami, Tampa, Oakland, Pittsburgh, etc can tank their payrolls and pocket millions on millions of revenue sharing dollars. I personally think a salary cap/floor that guarantees players X% of revenue is the answer...and with significantly expanded revenue sharing. That will never happen though as big markets don't want to share that much revenue...and I think players like the idea of uncapped contracts. Will be tougher to shell out $30+ million for a superstar with a salary cap/floor.

Their payroll is pretty high in fairness, and they'll have luxury tax to deal with. It's really hard to know how much they have to spend without knowing true revenue/expense figures...especially considering the new tv deal should theoretically lead to more revenue for the Cubs, at least I would assume so or why bother doing it.

I appreciate Josh's baseball related insights, but it really needs to stop there. He's tweeting about how there is no finite amount of money because there is no cap...which if there isn't a finite amount of money in his view, that means he thinks there's an INFINITE amount of money. It literally blows me away how little this guy knows about the business he operates in...but talks as if he knows everything. I believe that in his mind, every free agent should literally be able to name their price and teams should be lining up to pay that price or offer more...and if they don't, then it's collusion.