tmwiese55

I think it was reported Colts wanted to just put him on the IL and let him take the whole year off and then revisit next offseason. But he was adamant that he was done and not coming back so they put him on the retired list. Note that if he had any inkling of coming back he'd have been better off going on the IL as then it would still count as a year of service for his contract and get him closer to FA and able to play wherever he'd want. Just saying he must have been pretty clear in their meetings that this was it. Unless of course this leak isn't totally accurate nor is the positive spin from the Colts, so that basically Colts put on Retired list in order to still hold his rights for another year if he changes his mind.

I thought this was about Hiura. No, there's absolutely no reason to sign Grisham right now unless you give him a Kingery type deal. You'll be able to sign him in a year from now cheap if he hits well. "Great approach," is a rather vague sentiment to me, but a great eye? I think that's about the only thing he's proven in the minor leagues. Great approach to me means consistently swinging at balls in the zone, and not swinging at pitches out of the zone. Simple. And I would argue Grisham is elite in this regard. And as far as the minor leagues are concerned, what else could he have done there, really? IDK, not sucked for 3 years? As much as you can say he's just in a slump so no biggie one could easily say all the AAA run was a hot streak. Truth is somewhere in between. You already control him for 6-7 years, no need to overdo anything one way or the other. Just relax and see what happens, not everything has to be a big indictment on anyone. It's funny how biases show to preconceived opinions, he's just a slump and is awesome. Another guy has a bad stretch and he needs to be benched, demoted to bottom of lineup, traded immediately, for sure not resigned, etc.

So only 4 aces pitchers. OK. I know this is too far in the weeds at this point but that's what we're saying, this stuff is sooooo hard to predict for anyone. For example, you're justifying the ranking because no one knew DeGrom would be good, which is fine and is why the rankings were like that. I'm not really disagreeing or arguing with why they did it. But that's really what we're saying here, even the best people are massively off on this stuff because it's incredibly difficult. Obviously the team scouts/evaluators hit at a very low % themselves, now we're into online publications hit % which should obviously drop much lower or they should be working for a team. Again, I am generally on your side of this take so I hate that I've gotten on this side of the discussion. I fully agree those evaluators takes are stronger and can be more relied on than us (which was the original premise of the talk, I was just commenting I was surprised to see those two teams) and at least provides some info or guidance on prospects, so it's better to have them than not. And that of course being ranked higher is a good thing as at least you have depths and more swings, so to speak. Just saying this stuff isn't linear and exact so it might be best not to put too much weight on them or not acknowledge they're guessing as well. Heck, think of the person on who screamed at us that Peralta was god because some family member is a scout and he says so, usually it's probably best to temper expectations and realize that outside of the absolute blue chips a lot of this is a numbers game and kind of a crap shoot.

Sounds good and all but if I recall the new person running Atl is tied to him back from his Tor days and that's why he went there due to relationship. I'd assume he works something out with them. Probably missed our chance on him last year. Generally agree with your lower risk track here though, maybe some other similar options like that who are bit better than Moose. Seems contrary to your posts on financials elsewhere though, haha jk.

deGrom was a 24 year old pitching in A ball and put up fine but not spectacular numbers. Harvey was in the majors. Matz had just made his professional debut after being drafted in 2009. Syndergaard wasn't traded to the Mets until the winter of 2012. So as said they were all there and it was still ranked that low. Depending on when the list was done, Harvey would be on it or Syndegaard would be on it. As you point out It was all understandable as to why, plus maybe combine that with no higher end hitting prospects and boom a low ranking. That was kind of the point being made though, in that this stuff isn't gospel. And that even if the 'depth' isn't there that would lead to a high ranking it doesn't mean you're not going to pull out contributors like it seems MKE has kind of done lately. Really, I just happened to click on it and be surprised to see those two teams so low, I assume it was a quirk and not all that common to find it like that, was just pointing out that I thought it was interesting without trying to make too much of a point. Plus as I note it was 7 years so too much to dig into where everyone was for both teams. Cle was really the shocker to me when I saw it. And as I said, I agree with your overall side of all this that those folks making the list are going to shoot at a much higher rate than us idiots. It's just that even their % is going to be quite low due to the nature of the list, which I guess is kinda like baseball in general.

Most importantly, we here don't have any idea if they feel as negatively as Jobal about him or not so it's just very difficult to act like it's just a guarantee he's let go. There is plenty of indicators out there that lead me to think they think they can still save him. Us sitting here I'd probably lean towards the Jopal side that he's likely never gonna be what he was, but that doesn't mean the team doesn't think with another offseason of strengthening that hey wouldn't rather roll the dice on him for 5 mil vs some other low cost vet ala Gio. Spend that money on a low ceiling guy like Gio and you know what you're getting and that's at best mediocrity. With Jimmy, at least you have the possible upside in there still to get back to close to what he was. I mean, every other team's players come back from major injuries, why can't ours for once... Actually thinking about and relative to this specific roster issue question, bringing him up in Sept might be the perfect time gain more info with which to make that arby decision for next year.

We'll see, but I do think ya'll might be over guessing a bit on what he gets considering how the last few years of FA have gone and he'll be 30 next year. Still, I do agree that we'll be beaten on the deal as I said in my initial post and even that I said 'squint hard enough' to even try to justify a low to mid 20s per year. If I was Rendon I'd have just taken my 140-150mil from the Nats and been done with it, assuming they offered it at some point in the last year or so.

Yea for sure if it goes to 30. But I'm assuming the current market won't give him that much, but of course who knows. I was thinking more in the 22-27 mil type area for him, down per year if you increase years, etc. Still, as I said I think we'll get trumped as well so I agree with you. Say our offer was like 5/120ish. We could talk ourselves into that but chances are someone does beat it.

Going into the year, no it was not crazy to rate him like that. I was at the T Rats game last Friday and in their little booklet with the rosters etc they had a Brewers top 30 list of prospects. I assume it was done pre season, Grisham was ranked 30th and that's by their own org. Also, from that game our 1st round pick this year was the starting P and went about 4-5 innings no hit. Fastball never really got up above low 90s but sure seemed to pound the zone. Still, even if we can point out times they're wrong like we did on that list. As others have said, it's inexact science so that's a bit of the nature of it all. But in general, over the long haul they're going to be more accurate than jabronis like us who have never watched any of these guys actually play a game.

I'd love for a way to get Rendon here. I think if you squint hard enough you can justify the spending. For example, you cut out the the 10ish mil for Moose and 5ish mil for Shaw. Could let Grandal go at C and save that money too and spend the remainder on pitching. Then Braun's clears the year after. Then Cain's would clear for the back end of the contract. Probably don't/can't go past 5 years with him though so I'd still assume someone trumps us. For Hiura's D. Yea it sure would suck to have to use an athletic person at DH/1B. There just has to be someplace he can go. With how little he's played 2B though I don't think it's time to give up. Really it's just the throwing that is the killer. Seems mental a bit but just get some expert in to work with him and see how it goes next year. Also, yea it wouldn't surprise me if he's taller than Prince if it comes to going to 1B in 2021. I feel like it was pretty well known Prince's listed height was not accurate and he was a bit shorter than that, in the 5'10 range. Though I've never met him in person so IDK.

Just clicked on that list and other things that stood out to me were Cle and Mets also being bottom 5 in that. Now, of course I don't want to dig into where exactly all their pitchers were at that point. But obviously Cle has been winning ever since then and doing it with their own pitchers and players as they haven't really signed anyone other than Encarnacion and Santana, and however they got Andrew Miller. Mets of course have brought up ace level pitcher after pitcher. My quick check leads me to believe Degrom, Harvey, Wheeler, Matz were all there by then. Syndegaard traded to them in that year so it depends on when the list was compiled for him. I don't recall for sure on their in house hitters but a few seemingly would've come up through then as well, guys like Conforto and a few others, plus being 7 years back I don't know who was there by then.

JMB nails it on the trade scenario. Which several of us have said many times but of course it continues to be ignored for hot takes. FYI: Cain has a .375 OBP in August. Site I'm on goes monthly but doesn't go date by date, my quick math on the last 10 days of July puts him at .357 for that stretch. So he's actually been fairly good for a little over a month now, while of course still playing gold glove D. What an idiot our manager is for batting him in front Yeli!!!

Saw earlier today that Braun is like .209 career vs Wainwright. Might be the game they give him off in this series. That said, I didn't check him vs the other two Ps but the samples on those guys will be small whereas he had something like 90 ABs vs Wainwright. Of course, Wainwright isn't what he was either so much of that sample might be moot as well

Because when they play one up here they'd rather play Grisham because they think it helps increase their chances to win the game, sometimes it's that simple. Grisham has been playing. Braun sits 1/3 of games, then some for Cain and late game subs.

Yea just want them to keep hanging around. Get to Sept involved and anything can happen. I know they aren't winning the WS this year but the longer I can be entertained the better. As much as 'football is here' starts this week that is really only two days a week...

I don't see really any scenario it'll happen. But IMO the only one that could be logical to me would be for a legit ace level pitcher young and controlled for years. Only one I could think of would be Syndegaard but the Mets made the right choice and kept him, realizing how dumb it would be to move him with his team control and skills. For another position player in a similar situation as him (age, contract, etc) just seems like shuffling chairs for the sake of it for both teams.

Agree. Of course not banking on anything this year. but another offseason to get healthy and strengthen it and who knows on next year. Anyone have an velocity data on his recent strong showings in AAA, if that's even available out there? Hopefully he shows some good signs in an assumed Sept call up

Somebody on here as this debate has gone on went through all this data in his time with LAD and found nothing to it. If I recall, he usually beat his replacement but maybe some years was a smidge behind and of course LAD has had great pitching his whole time there. Chances are this is a small sample thing with him and Pina, though I grant Pina is great at D. But that doesn't mean Grandal is bad. [sarcasm]Heck, lets not forget PIna was apparently half benched last year for his supposed lesser ability than a 40 year old journeyman in his ability to call games.[/sarcasm]

As well as so many guys recently called up that don't count anymore like Huira, Grisham, Burnes, Peralta, Woodruff, and even Hader. Good post imo. Generally seems to have a good eye on which prospects he really values and thinks are good and which ones he thinks for lack of a better word 'expendable'. So far he hasn't been burned too much on prospects out. Although I'd expect one of the MIA guys to pan out well for them, one just has to, but for Yeli it is what it is

Things like dropping 25 mil on two FAs right before the season? Or I guess that doesn't count as we need more

Maybe, I would argue Hiura would be recognized as a better prospect by every mlb team than Trammell, especially at the time of the trade. I’d have done Turang and Ashby or something comparable to secure Bauer for this August/September and 2020. And I’d trade Cain to even up the salary for next year and would have a legitimate #1 and strong #2 to compete for a title with Yelich next year. And still have ~ 25-40 million to plug holes at SS 3B CF. Ahh if only reality was a video game.

Yes, but we can't just pull those Padres things out of thin air. We would've had to trump that whole package. Good luck on that. Our only way to get our hands on the Padres aspects of it we'd have had to use Keston.

I mean, Brewers are 7th in MLB in stolen bases and 3rd in NL. I don't know how one can use lack of running game against them. Somebody not fast just the other day was running on a 3-2 pitch without 2 outs, don't recall who, might've been Grandal.

I liked all those moves Cincy made. For Bauer, what are we gonna do there? Did you see what it cost and what Cle got back? We'd have had to give Hiura, Grisham, maybe one MLB player like Thames, pitching prospect like Burnes, and maybe more to match that deal for 1.5 years of Bauer. Parlay that LAD trade that led to this trade though and Cincy killed it imo. That said, doesn't it seem very similar to what we pulled off to steal Yelich? That's exactly what you want and he did it and nailed it. Overall though if you don't want to support and follow a team that can't afford to take ridiculous financial risks then frankly you should just follow another team as it's not changing anytime soon. We can cross our fingers for a real cap similar to NFL but it's just not happening anytime soon.

They are quite the model aren’t they? 60-80 million payroll, ~.500 most years, 90 wins last year. To win the games they do with a 70 payroll is really astounding isn’t it? When you draft well and regularly draft high, it makes it possible to stack your team with young pre-arby talent. The Rays do some innovative things, but they also largely grow from within, and deal off pieces when they get pricey. That tends to catch up to teams that don't continue to restock young minors talent. Just like the 4 year window I pointed out earlier in which they dropped off big time and won 68 games one year. According to this person, they would've fired all their management one of those years and the current geniuses running the team would be working elsewhere instead. Note, and I'm not saying what they're doing is wrong. It's what they have to do in their situation and they're doing an amazing job. I'd love to poach guys from that org. It's just odd because exactly what one would say about TB doing on a small budget would for sure be said about MKE/Stearns by any unbiased observer in regards to performance/budget. Plus, didn't have the aid of years of top picks leading up to it. For budget, a few people nailed it. You don't spend it just to spend it. Say you have 140 mil possible to spend in a year, but the guy or two you'd sign to get you there at 15ish mil would require 5-6 year commitments (thus ruining future budgets plus just massive amount of risk overall) well then it would be stupid to do it. So, a smart way to really maximize your budget use and flexibility, while lowering risk (since we're the smallest market) would be to sign good players on low risk one year deals if you find great opportunities. Oh wait, our idiot GM did exactly that. Now, lets say they had another 15 mil in this year's budget if absolutely needed for a good signing, deadline deal to go for it etc. Would it have been smart spend 15 Mil per year for 5 years to get Kimbrel? I would strongly argue No because it's almost for sure going to be a bad contract and would kill future years while who knows how he'd even do this year, which is holding true so far. I remember someone on here was absolutely adamant about signing Kimbrel and how dumb it was to not, I'd have a good guess who it was. 1-2 years short, smart, low risk, sure spend the money but stupid long term contract just to spend to hit a budget is dumb. Stearns did this exactly right with Moose/Grandal.