Lathund

Of course that wasn't the entirety of the thread, but that did happen. I went back and read through it just to make sure, so it's not me making things up as you suggest. And FWIW, it wasn't your posts I was referring to.

Also speaking of the rule 5 draft, reminded me of the constant harping on about Shane Smith last year. First it was the same few posters bumping the thread over and over after each good start. Talking about what a terrible mistake it was by the front office, and ridiculing anyone who didn't agree. Then he started struggling in the second half, and then it was different posters bumping it after every bad start instead. It really got quite ridiculous, not protecting him was an "unforgivable mistake" and something Matt Arnold should get fired over. People who didn't agree that it was a terrible mistake were ridiculed, as if they couldn't see the objective truth, or that they were arguing in bad faith. Really brought out some of the worst posting (and posters) on here.

Probably is. But it's not as much of a certain thing as it might appear, depends on what they expect from him vs RHP. His success this year is almost entirely against LHP, and if they don't think he can get it done against righties, they might not want to pay $10-12m for a short-side platoon 1B only. But more than that I think it comes down to what else they have at 1B. If they feel like they have a better full-time option, Vaughn would be a good trade candidate, could get something pretty good for him. If they don't re-sign Bauers and they don't feel good about Black/Adams/Burke stepping in, then Vaughn on a one year deal even with mediocre results against RHP makes sense. Anyway back to the topic: Adams, Williams, and maybe a reliever or two, if they have some standout stuff/pitches. The likely lockout (I don't think it'll affect the season much, or at all, but definitely the offseason) with perhaps no rule 5 draft, probably means they'll lean towards not protecting many of the fringe guys.

Frias 6-6 with 2 doubles and a SB. 6 RBI but no run scored. I don't know if they do MiLB scorigamis, but that might be one.

Uniform numbers in Baseball, or most sports really, never really held much interest to me, but they absolutely do in football (soccer) for some reason. It's kinda funny how when playing OOTP or FHM (Hockey sim) I just randomize the numbers, not caring one iota. But a player having the "wrong" number in Football Manager (Where you set the numbers at the start of the season and can't change them) can ruin the whole season. Kind of. Got a whole system for the entire squad, and I even avoid certain formations because they'll have starters with the wrong number for their position. I guess there it has to do with numbers still being strongly associated with positions there, whereas they aren't at all to the same degree in other sports. I'm sure Asamoah Gyan is a lovely person, but I still have an irrational hatred for him, many years later, for wearing #3 as a striker. It's just wrong.

I really hope they don't send him down when Rengifo is back off the IL. It's very unlikely Pratt will hit worse than Rengifo did, given the high floor offered by the plate discipline and contact ability, but with the massive difference in defensive and baserunning value, he'll be an upgrade even if he's a decent bit worse at the plate. There are no service time considerations to take into account, so just let him play, and let him learn. Ortiz and Hamilton can platoon at 3B, and Ortiz can give Pratt/Turang some days off when needed. Hamilton/Ortiz consistently at 3B, and Hamilton NOT at SS are big defensive upgrades.

We can't know if surgery is the best option. The thing with nerve injuries (he has the version of TOS where a nerve is compressed, not the vascular kind) is that they take time to heal. So even if he didn't have any pressure remaining on that nerve, it still might not be functioning fully due to not having had enough time to heal. In which case surgery would do more harm than good. Fans are always quick to always go for the surgery in every case, but there is usually a reason for not taking that route, How good that reason is can vary, but it's safe to say the doctors involved know a lot more about the injury and treatment than random fans online. Maybe he'll end up needing the surgery, maybe not. Either way, which option is better is not something any one of us can know.

CC is still owed another $20m, and I imagine that Jed Hoyer's future is also closely tied to him. It was such a "prestige" signing, and they invested a lot (financial and otherwise) in it. Firing him now would be a condemnation of Hoyer's own strategy really, and you'd think the Cubs would be reluctant to have him find the next manager too. I think that if Greg goes, so does Hoyer. So it won't happen now. They really should move on from Hoyer in the offseason though; a midseason change there is tougher, with (probably) only internal candidates available. I remember being quite happy when they extended Hoyer. Not because he's terrible, but because I don't think he can make them a winning team. Doesn't really work in a big market way to use resources to win (Dombrowski style), and not in the analytical Rays/Brewers type way. Rather incorporates elements from both, but takes the worst of each, instead of (like the Dodgers) the best. Might luck into a good year or two, but that front office isn't going to create a consistent winner without some real changes.

Collapse? No. But they also aren't as good as their record. They have the run differential of a .500 team, their pitching is not good. They are where they are due to sequencing, record in 1-run games, and through the luck of barely having any injuries. Clearly they are better than what was expected before the season. Maybe they can sneak a wild card spot. But legit division contenders? No.

If the 8 yrs ~30m is even in the ballpark, it's hard to see how this could turn out badly. There is a chance, sure, that he'll not be a major leaguer at all. But it's pretty slim. Projection systems (Unclear exactly how up to date the projections are) for this year has two outliers; ZiPS (71 wRC+) and ATC (101 wRC+). OOPSY, The Bat and Steamer are between 82 and 91. (Keep in mind, this is just for this, age 21 season) With his defense and baserunning, even the low end of this isn't a terrible outcome. Of course, that would be disappointing, but you're weighing that risk against the possibility of a lot more. If he's a league average hitter, this is a steal. Kevin Kiermaier had a 95 wRC+, Lorenzo Cain and PCA are at 103 wRC+, JBJ 82 wRC+, Billy Hamilton (21st centurý edition) had a 66 wRC+. To give some context as far as glove-first CFs in that range of offensive output goes. And none of them put up the kind of offensive numbers in AAA that Lara did at that age. Only one close was JBJ, at 25, when he already had MLB experience.

I think they'll prioritize someone on the 40-man roster over it needing to be a LHP, so I would expect Easton McGee. This is based on Koenig needing more rehab appearances, if not, it'll be him, Though I gotta say I hadn't realized how well Rom had pitched, at least as far as ERA/FIP/xERA goes. I just think that with some likely promotions soon etc, they'll prioritize the 40-man spots over an "ideal" R/L bullpen setup.

Is it really a big name though? Compared to what? Like 7 letters? Come on! 3 syllables is good efficiency with such a short name, but even so, I don't see how you could call it a big name. He's no Simeon Woods Richardson.

Fischer is probably the biggest boom-bust guy there. I'd be OK with letting someone else take the risk that the contact issues don't improve as he goes up. The other one is Peña. With Pratt, Made, Ebel (and for a while longer Turang) around, it's one area where you can afford to trade someone. And Peña can get us someone really good in return. I would never do it for a rental, it'd have to be a long-term type of move. Like if he's the headliner in a Yelich type trade. Not that I know who would be the Yelich in this situation. I gotta say though, I'm generally very much a believer in holding onto them a good while longer. Especially the ones with some big, loud tools. Just like I'm OK with trading Fischer for the right return, it's still the case that other front offices will also be very well aware of the hit tool risk. And that'll be factored into the return, reducing what we get back. So with a prospect that has real risk, but also a high upside (In this case due to big time power), the best value play is really to stay the course. Or, to give an even more generic answer: Brewers should trust their evaluations. Trade prospects if you think you're getting more in return than what you value the prospect(s) at. Keep them otherwise.

He's not exactly "old" for his level, but you kind of expect an experienced college hitter do do well in A-ball. Striking out as much as he does at that level is a very real concern too. If he looks good at 3B and improves the contact issues even slightly, he'll be up there. If he's 1B/DH only and keeps whiffing, it'll be hard to climb the rankings no matter how he hits.

I get the appeal of Skubal, obviously. Brewers have one of the best rotations, and overall pitching staffs in MLB already, but slotting Skubal into the playoff rotation over one of Woodruff/Henderson/Priester still makes for a scary playoff rotation. Thing is though, it's just such a crazy amount to give up for half a season of anyone. The various proposals are similar to, or more than, what we gave up for 5 full seasons of Yelich (None of the prospects panned out, but IIRC Brinson was upwards of top 20-30, Harrison as high as 50s-60s, Diaz towards the bottom of top 100 lists. It was a quite hefty package at the time). I think the more reasonable package above, with Jett + Adamczewski + Gasser is going to be far too light, considering how many teams will be interested and driving the bidding. Maybe if the rotation was a huge weakness I'd be more inclined to do it, but I would rather use the prospect capital in separate trades for real weaknesses. My belief when it comes to trading is that the real value comes from either big trades for multiple years of really good players (like the Yelich move, or Crochet, or the original Sale trade etc), or from cheaper rentals. As a general trend that is, there will always be trades of other types where either side completely misjudges things. The long-term trades I like because the prospect cost isn't linear with the years of control (Partly for good reasons). You don't pay twice as much for the last full season as you do at the deadline for a rental, two years of team control isn't twice as much as one year. And in particular, 4-5 years isn't 4-5 as much as for 1 year. Simply because no trade would ever get made at that rate, and which is why so few of those trades happen. As for why the lesser rentals work, I see a few reasons. One is when you don't also need to pay for the QO return, if you're trading for someone who can't/won't be offered it. Another is that these players usually aren't stars who the selling team needs to be perceieved to get value for (to the extent front offices care about this). Instead their team's season is over, they just want *something*, and if it's a team that's not looking to rebuild, they might take a fringe surplus player or high-floor AAA guy. The value is just so much better. And just as a more general thing, I'd generally avoid bidding wars. Only the seller benefits from that. Skubal will fetch a king's ransom even under normal circumstances, where it might be worth it. But driving it up further, and it gets harder to justify.