Lathund

It's the right move. Stearns has made a lot of changes to many aspects of the organization, including player development in the minors, scouting, analytics (And more than that, building up and integrating that capacity) ,the coaching staff etc. Things that take time to evaluate. Completely changing course yet again would just delay everything further. All the while they'd still be paying Stearns. You also have to factor in what in the Mets struggles this year are about bad decisions Stearns made (And there are certainly those), but also about how even decisions that made sense at the time have turned out far worse than expected. Like was Bichette at 3B, a square peg in a round hole, the best way to spend that money? Probably not. But was there any reason to think that the 28 year old with a career 122 wRC+ prior to this year would be as bad as he has been? No. They signed some players with injury histories which is a risk, but have the position player injuries (Including to Soto and Lindor, their two big stars who don't have that kind of injury history) also been more than expected? Yes. Can go over all kinds of moves made or not made, but either way I think it's fair to say that while they aren't good, they are also not worst-team-in-baseball levels of bad. At the very least, put out this kind of message now, and give it at the very least to the offseason before even thinking about a change. If things countinue in the wrong direction, it might be that firing Stearns is the right move, it's just that it's premature to do it now.

I don't think this is a very good way of doing business. What if he suffers a serious injury, or there are obvious signs of decline, before the Brewers can trade him and they're stuck with that $100m? If you're not able or willing to live with the contract you're acquiring, don't acquire it. I don't think the Brewers operate like this, just like I don't believe the seemingly common narrative that they offered the QO to Woody believing/hoping he'd decline it. They wouldn't have offered it if accepting it would've impacted their plans. If you want a 3B just for this season, ideally get a rental. Or a versatile, cheaper, player if it's for multiple years. Now I presume that part of the reason you even thought of Chapman is that the rental 3B market isn't very attractive. But the way I see it, the move then isn't to try to fit a square peg into a round hole, even if the square peg is very productive any nice. It's to not play at all, or play a different game (i.e improve elsewhere).

My main issue with Paredes is one that was brought up earlier, which is about where he hits his HRs. The raw HR numbers do look appealing. Then look at his splits. Career .764 OPS. In Houston it's .822, in Tampa it's .864, and those account for about 36% of his PAs. And that's not a coincidence. As a HR hitter he is about as extreme as you can possibly get. There are pull hitters, then there are extreme pull hitters, and then there is Paredes. He has 102 career homers. ALL of them are to left, or left-center. He doesn't have much power at all, he can only hit one out when he pulls it. Houston, with the Crawford boxes, has one of the shortest LF in baseball. Tropicana Field also had a short porch. Which is why it was such a head scratcher when the Cubs acquired him. There might not be any other hitter in baseball whose value depends so much on a certain aspect of field dimensions as Paredes. So with that in mind, when looking to trade for him, it makes no sense to pay as if he was a .764 OPS type hitter. Only makes sense if it's at a discount. And why would the Astros do that? To them it's the opposite, he's worth more to them than to just about any other team, and should drive a hard bargain. It's just a very difficult deal to find common ground on.

I was a big believer in Tyler Black for years, and while I haven't given up completely it doesn't look good. Now that he's also not hitting in AAA, it's not even really a case of not getting the opportunity to prove himself. There just isn't reason enough to try him, absent injuries. I think if he had managed to stick at one of the more premium positions he tried (2B/3B/CF), or even if he excelled at the lesser ones (LF/1B) he'd have gotten more playing time. But it's hard to roster and find playing time for a 1B/LF/DH with subpar defense and whose game isn't based on power. I think as per the last poster, he could end up a fringe MLB player who will stick around in some fashion. Like, speaking of the Marlins, a Garrett Cooper perhaps; although he had a surprisingly decent 107 wRC+.

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.