KeithStone53151

I like this, pretty much agree across the board. Especially the notes about Syndergaard that I bolded. I know we have a 40 man crunch coming this offseason, so utilizing some of those prospects to make trades would seem to make a ton of sense.

That had the sound too, darnit!

Nice job getting back to second. You can get caught off the bag easily on that play

I feel like Braun is a better leadoff option than Miller. I don't like decent obp but low avg/low contact type guys in the leadoff spot. You could also stagger your lefties that way by batting Miller 6th. CC has really gotten away from staggering his lefties...

Without even having to think about it, YES, 100% YES! Do you think it makes sense from Minnesota's perspective? I guess that may depend on the other offers. I have to imagine a Corey Ray or Zack Brown might be the best prospect the Twins could get for Dozier, they may prefer Villar. I really think MLB ready talent or very upper levels of the minors talent makes more sense for the Twins than someone like(theoretically) Lutz or Henry...a lower minors player, even if the ceiling is lower.

I'm not sure how realistic this is, but would you trade Dozier for Villar straight up? Minnesota has a fairly solid team and may find value in players at the MLB level, moreso than the Rays/Royals/Tigers type teams

Actually, if we traded Arcia for a SP...I would still hope he does well. Same way I'm happy to see Scooter and Segura and others do well when they leave(only when they play the other 28 teams of course). I don't root against our guys hoping to win the trade. Honestly, it sucks that the Red Sox ruined Thornburgs arm with their bogus shoulder program. I liked Thornburg and wanted him to do well. Anyways regarding Degroms value, the market for top notch SP has been set in the roughly $25 million range. See Strasburg, Arrieta, etc. Scherzer got $30 million, but so much was deferred the present value was closer to $25 million per. I can understand the argument that a majority of that value should be allocated to prime years. Maybe his prime year value is closer to $30 or $35 million per year. Hard to argue it much higher than that though.

The last unsigned MLB first-round pick was in 2015, Kyle Funkhouser at 35 overall. Between 2016 and 2017, of all the players drafted by all the teams in the first ten rounds, five did not sign. Jeez, so it really is all posturing and non-sense(from my perspective). I can understand the player side though, they get one chance to negotiate this and for all they know...this is the only real pro baseball money they ever get.

More than 1/3 of first-round picks remain unsigned. It would be an upset if all do not end up signing. This often goes down to the wire. It is what it is, teams and players both trying to maximize value. I felt like with the bonus pool caps, that whole going down to the wire thing changed. I remember when we signed Bradley/Jungmann, I recall negotiations not really even starting until a few hours before the deadline or something weird like that. It's obvious we can offer X, the only variable in play might be trying to save some for Daniel. Here's hoping it works out, I know you're right that most end up signing. I think each year somewhere between 0 and 2 1st round picks don't sign. Maybe it's just how I'm wired, but I can't understand turning down $4 million. Put it in super safe investments and live off $100k a year for life money at that age, without ever having to work if you don't want to. Turning it down, best case scenario is he goes to college and kills it...and gets $7 million in 3 years. Worst case...he gets a college education and $10k signing bonus as a senior if he's terrible or gets hurt.

Has anyone heard any updates on Turang? 4 days left. We've had most of our guys signed for a bit, I feel like if Turang was going to sign...he would have. I'm growing more and more pessimistic by the day. I guess it's possible we are trying to land both Turang and Daniel and are working out how to divvy up the remaining space.

Regarding Simmons, you can initially argue that the Angels were stupid and vastly overpaid for Simmons. Why would you trade so much for a guy that seemingly is a lock for elite defense and 650ish ops...as he seemingly leveled off? The other side, is that the Angels scouted or saw something they could fix...or saw that he was getting unlucky...whatever it was, they did a fantastic job of landing Simmons and likely won the trade. Maybe Arcia doesn't figure it out and bounce out of it like Simmons did(and many have as they approach their mid-late 20s), but simply saying he's having a bad year and therefore has 0 value is pure nonsense. Arcia isn't a rental where the next 2 months are all that matters. You'd have 4-5 years of cheap team control on him. I think it's fairly obvious that Hiura holds more value than Arcia right now. One bat is a virtual lock to be successful at this level, the other has the plus defense but may or may not hit. I think you need some good secondary pieces if you headline with Arcia, but it's not an unreasonable thought. It really depends how the Mets value him. If their scouts see something they can fix in his mechanics, he'll very likely hit. His bat to ball skills are tremendous, his biggest problem is pitch recognition caused by bad mechanics.

Nottingham is K-ing 5x more than walking. Projection systems have him basically matching Pina’s production. He is not ready and he isn’t a clear upgrade, but he is different, so there is that. Whether or not Nottingham is ready, I can assure you that you may as well throw any projections on Nottingham straight in the garbage. All those projections are generally worthless for young players. Nottingham is probably very close to a callup. At the same time, if we were talking with the Marlins about a Realmuto trade in which Nottingham is involved...we wouldn't want to send him up to MLB to potentially struggle and potentially hurt his value. Going to be an interesting month...

Have the Brewers announced a corresponding move or moves? I feel like we could see more than one move today.

I think Nottingham could find his way up. The last couple years, we've brought up significant prospects around this time. Woodruff, Hader, Arcia to name a few. This time around, if he comes up I want him to get significant playing time. A timeshare with Pina would be completely reasonable at the outset. All that said, the catching position is a much different animal than any other position. It might make more sense to have him open with the club at the start of a season when he's deemed ready.

Those updates were minor, we'll get a more real update in late July I believe. And again if he was a Yankee or Cub he might be a top 25 prospect. Of course Peralta isn't what those guys are right now, but he's only 22 and having significant MLB success. Pair that with his minor league success and he's a heck of a prospect. The reason we'd trade for Degrom would be to win now, although I could absolutely understand the argument of not trading Peralta because his upside is probably a #2 starter right now. Again, right now, Degrom is better. And regarding Syndergaard, teams should be wary of his injury history before trading for him. That might be part of why the Mets are shopping him, they are concerned with his injuries and want to sell high before he suffers a more serious injury. I highly highly doubt the Mets get value back for Syndergaard equivalent to 3.5 years of a 5 WAR pitcher, I don't even think the Cubs or Red Sox GM's would make such a stupid move. I think most people severely discount the risk in trading for Syndergaard, I'm not sure I'd trade Peralta or especially Hiura for him. My general trade talk centers around Degrom, as I'm more confident he would actually pitch for us than Syndergaard if we traded for him. I have no interest in shelling out payroll dollars and prospect capital to help a guy rehab injuries for 3.5 years and pitch sparingly. That does us no good.

I agree. The system has solid depth with good prospects at all levels, but it is lacking top-flight guys. Part of that is, I think, the team does a crap job of hyping their prospects, especially at the lower levels. But part, too, is that they have a lot of solid guys, but few game changers ... and those in the system that do have game-changing ability (like Ray and Gatewood) haven't developed as quickly as we would like, which has made them lose a bit of prospect luster. Hiura is one of the few that is showing that type of ability, but he also has warts with questionable defense and athleticism, along with durability concerns. If he is the centerpiece for someone like DeGrom or Thor, or some other top starter who is controllable for 2+ more seasons, while it would be tough to swallow, I think you do it. Believe me on this, the Mets will not be scrolling through our prospect list on mlb.com when deciding whether to trade their pitchers. Our prospects tend to get shafted on these lists in favor of big market prospects, it's just the way it is. The teams will have a much better feel for how good our prospects are and where they belong in the rankings than these lists show. That's why saying things like "so we're going to trade a package for 1 top 100 prospect for Degrom" comments are so silly. The package I've proposed centered around Burnes and Peralta includes a likely top 50 and another top 100 pitcher along with good secondary pieces. We easily have the ability to add good secondary pieces to a trade with our depth. That's plenty to get a deal done, probably more than we should be giving up given the helium Peralta has right now.

We don’t have a farm system capable of landing a TOR guy unless Hiura is part of the deal. Depth doesn’t matter when you are trading for controllable stars, it’s top prospects that do. Then I think you don't really understand our farm system very well. Peralta has been skyrocketing up prospect rankings with every good start. Sure he had 1 bad one recently, but at the same time he showed great composure bouncing back from a rough 1st inning of bloop hits to keep us in the game. Peralta should probably be a top 50 prospect at the update and he's mlb ready, if he was in a big market he'd be top 25. Hiura won't be THAT far ahead of Peralta in prospect rankings, and Peralta is a pitcher which generally has more value...especially given he's MLB ready. Peralta with good secondary pieces could definitely headline a deal for Degrom or Syndergaard.

No question about it. Hiura is going to part of any deal for a controllable TOR type. That is seriously short-sighted thinking. Hiura or bust, no GM is that closed-minded. Keep in mind especially with Degrom, we are getting 2.5 years of control for likely over $30 million. It's not like this incredible bargain contract. Market value is maybe $25 million per year at best, and we'll be paying $12-18 million per year depending on arbitration. Yes it probably is a bargain contract, but not as team-friendly as some of you make it seem. The payroll alone, especially in the last year, will be an obstacle for bringing in talent or retaining talent. Syndergaard may not be as expensive on a per year basis as we get more team control and the early years to dilute the expensive years, and his significant injury history also drives down his value. That's part of why his value is so difficult to evaluate. Should he be valued as a top 5 pitcher in baseball, or a guy that may pitch 90 good innings a year for you if you're lucky?

I generally think you discount our other prospects more than they should be, that said...it's possible. It's hard to know what they are specifically looking for. If the Mets do demand Hiura and don't end up budging, then it's simply not meant to be in my opinion. Regarding the article, it seemed to me that the yankees package was much much lighter than the other 3 packages. Considering it's a NY article, that's not surprising.

There is no way in hell Arcia headlines a deal for Syndergard. Dubon is more valuable at this point, and do you think the Mets would value HIM as a centerpiece? Use your head. Um, what? Dubon is not even close to more valuable than Arcia. First off, he's out for the season injured...second, he isn't remotely close to the defender Arcia is. He's seriously struggling at the plate, but he's also only 23 and has a lot of experience at the MLB level. There's a very good chance he comes around. I still think it's highly unlikely Degrom or Syndergaard move at the deadline. I think they'll want better than the Chris Sale return and nobody will offer it. Will be interesting to see how it plays out. Regarding Hiura, he's as close to "can't miss" as it gets based on all scouting available. The bat is there, he's going to hit. He's not like one of the incredible toolsy prospects with significant holes in their swing that simply may never hit at the mlb level...he's almost certainly going to hit. If he can play an adequate 2nd base, which most reports say he can, his floor is a very solid hitting 2b at the mlb level. Very minimal risk in him.

Why'd we send him down again? Cain might be coming off the bench when he gets back...

I think Broxton starts in CF today. Also hard to imagine Arcia sitting after a 2 hit day. I'm gonna go Thames RF Braun LF Aguilar 1B Miller 2B Perez 3B Broxton CF Pina C Arcia SS If shaw plays, slide him 4th after Aguilar, miller 5th, everything else the same. Maybe they'll wisen up finally and sit him down for 10 days.

I can't believe all the posts that he may be a long term option. Nothing that Stearns has done leads me to think he's ready to dump $250 million into 1 guy. I was honestly blown away when he dropped $80 million on Cain, and he's gonna triple that the very next offseason? Even if we could at the moment fit it into the budget, it's just not happening. It would hamstring us too much down the line financially, especially if he ended up a bust signing. Now there's definitely a chance we could be in the mix for him as a rental. Heck we might even be a top 5 contender. But the long term talk is pointless. Our odds of signing him are right up there with Greinke and Fielder...I'm sure Machado is looking for top dollar and we can't offer it.

I generally tend to agree things are lining up fairly well for the Brewers. Many of our pitchers are overperforming, we have a lot of hitters at peak age right now...and we have serious minor league ammunition to plug holes. That doesn't mean we should go nuts and sell half the farm for a real shot at winning the hole thing, but we can make some prudent moves that improve our chances while not mortgaging the future. To say it isn't our year is really silly, I'd like to know what the team needs to look like for those posters to consider it "our year".

One thing to keep in mind in this discussion. With every start Peralta makes, his value is going up. He's looked very good at the MLB level in every start but 1. It becomes more and more possible with every start that Peralta is good enough to be the headliner of a Degrom deal should we opt to target Degrom.