Frayed Knot

bmfc1 wrote: We can disagree but to me, this was a clever move by the Twins GM. I dunno, they essentially paid about $2.2 million* for 7 weeks of nothingness from Morales and about 1/3 of a season for a middle reliever who walks nearly 5 per/9 innings. Now if this Pryor guy goes on to be a significant reliever in the future then it becomes a different story, but it's not exactly the way I'd hope my GM goes fishing for bullpen help.. * approx 1/4 of the season of Morales at $10 mil plus a pro-rated portion of the ML minimum for the pitcher

But if you covered him with garbage, Ken Sanders would still have style.

Oh, and [u:3h7rl07f]Goossen[/u:3h7rl07f] is spelled wrong on the card above.

batmagadanleadoff wrote: I sorta disagree with your point about "unfairness". Sorta. Because fairness is often man-made or legislated, created by fiat or proclamation. Whatever the powers that be say is fair is fair. Is the DH fair? What about cigarettes? What the hell is so fair about cigarettes? They sell you something that's powerfully addictive and that destroys you over time. The only thing good about cigarettes is that they make their manufacturers among the most powerful and wealthiest people in the world. And if those masters of the universe don't smoke, they're even better off. The difference here is that this idea of "gaining traction" (if indeed it really is that) isn't to combat some sort of overall, and yes legislated, unfairness: i.e., pitchers have too much power therefore lower the mound, ban the spitter, shrink the strike zone, etc., but rather is aimed at combatting what some perceive to be an unfairness that this recent shifting craze (which isn't really recent) has on a small segment of hitters, namely slow-footed and dead-pull lefties; against a skill-set, in other words, not an entire category. It's why I termed this whole thing as a solution in search of a problem as it's only a problem in the way that the size of the field and value of extra-base hits discriminates against low-power hitters, or that 90-foot bases are unfair to slow dudes, or that pitching is to the weak-armed.

quote="Ceetar" = He talked to one coach that said "make it illegal" claims it's "gaining traction" And then "supposes" what it would entail. --- Sure, that's part of his job. If he were to say that there's talk within baseball as to what to do about these shifts and then not explain or at least speculate about what a change might look like then it would be a totally pointless exercise. By suggesting that banning the SS from crossing over an imaginary home plate thru 2nd base line as a most likely outcome if this were to gain enough momentum is very different from envisioning the future of baseball as one with boxes drawn all over the field specifying where each of the fielders is allowed to stand. "He took some grumblings and extrapolated. It's not like this is some internal MLB document that they're mulling over." --- Not a document, no, but insider-type chatter. The alternative is to ignore it but I don't see what purpose that serves. He's a reporter and he's reporting.

In fairness to Verducci he's just being the messenger here, I don't see where he's endorsing anything.

"And while they're banning the rule on banning shifts before it even takes effect" --- Who's they? "I think the main problem with the rule is that no one's used to it, and that baseball's been a shift as you please game for forever. If this rule had been in effect for a long while, no one would be giving it a second thought." --- In other words, had baseball been a different game all along then it would be different? I'm not against this idea merely because it's different, it's that I think it's a solution in search of a problem and that I don't see any unfairness in using a shift. The defensive team is doing nothing more than engaging in a kind of risk/reward strategy that they're betting will help them more than it hurts but with no guarantees. Meanwhile the offensive side isn't stuck with something they can't combat as they have numerous options via altering their approach or altering the type of player they seek.

Geez Gee - whatyadoingman!

Dressing up like Cleopatra and putting pinwheels on your tits ... I tells ya talent like that just doesn't come along every day.

Nothing to do with the NL, but do you know who else suxx? ... the Rangers! They just scored a whopping total of EIGHT runs vs the Yanx while losing three times in a four-game series. Yeah they were shorted four innings there by Wednesday's rain-out (which inconveniently came during a Darvish start) but they still suck and are now in last place three games behind Houston (who would have called THAT prior to the season?)

The other thing I'm finding funny here is the idea that, 'OMG offense is down, we must DO SOMETHING!' -- barely a decade after folks were complaining about too much offense.

Tom Verducci talks about the increasing trend of defensive shifts in MLB and claims that support for, or at least consideration of, a ban on such shifts "is gaining some traction" within baseball. The simplest (only?) rule that could implemented would be a ban on an uneven number of infielders on one side of the diamond; mainly this would mean no shortstops can set up to the right of 2nd base as the opposite shift is rarely employed because of the length of the throw involved negates the advantage. The fuel for this is that it's killing offense and specifically LH pull/power-hitters - and Tommy lays out a bunch of stats in his piece to show this. I think it's nonsense myself. If you don't like the shifts and/or you feel that these new-fangled defenses are stifling some of your better hitters, then do one of two things. 1) teach them to defeat the shifts with some opposite field hitting 2) take advantage of the market inefficiency by selling slow/LH/pull guys and importing speedier, all-field hitters. Or, do a combination of both 1 & 2

MFS62 wrote: Dave Sims @TheDaveSimsShow Kendrys Morales obtained from Minnesota for reliever Stephen Pryor. Expected in Seattle Friday. Did Morales even unpack in Minneapolis? They didn't sign him until the 2nd week of June (he was one of those draft/compensation cases). Seattle importing a DH and the Yanx continually looking for pitching are added reminders of just how poorly the seemingly huge (at the time) deal of Michael Pineda for Jesus Montero has turned out for both sides. Lots of injuries, suspensions, and just plain suck!

It's not just me, right-- that's a LOT for a bullpen arm (even one with an okay team option/buyout for next year) in a market with a lot of arm-sellers, yes? Hard to say. Never heard of either one of these guys until just now. Cribbing from John Sickels: Corey Knebel, RHP: ... saved 37 games over three seasons for [u-Texas], posting a 2.06 ERA in 170 innings with a 180/50 K/BB ratio ... moved through the minors very quickly, posting a 1.62 ERA this year in 33 innings between Double-A Erie and Triple-A Toledo, with a 43/17 K/BB. He's already pitched 8.2 big league innings with the Tigers, with 11 hits and seven runs allowed but an 11/3 K/BB. 6-3/195 - 22 y/o. He has classic bullpen stuff with a 93-98 MPH fastball, averaging 95, and a power breaking ball. He has a changeup as well and scouts report that his arsenal is diverse enough for him to start, but funky high-effort mechanics make him a better fit for bullpen work. His command is generally good and he has the mindset needed to be a successful closer. Jake Thompson, RHP: ... [has] been quite successful as a pro and has been effective in 2014, posting a 3.14 ERA in 16 starts for High-A Lakeland with a 79/25 K/BB in 83 innings. Recently promoted to Double-A Erie, he's made two starts in the Eastern League and held his own, with three runs in 11 innings and a 7/4 K/BB. 6-4/235 - 20 y/o. A four-pitch starter, he features a low-90s fastball, a slider, a curveball, and a circle changeup. Although none of his pitches are outstanding, none of them are bad, either, and everything plays up due to solid command. The Tigers managed his workload cautiously but he has the build to be a durable inning-eating starting pitcher. ANALYSIS: I like this for the Rangers but it makes sense for both teams. The Tigers (as usual) are in win-now mode and Soria provides a helpful stretch-run boost for the bullpen. The Tigers use their farm system aggressively for such trades each year, which is what it is there for. From the Rangers point of view, Knebel and Thompson are more likely to be part of the next good Rangers team than Soria is. Knebel should be ready to contribute in the major league pen very soon and Thompson is a very solid prospect who deserves more attention than he's received. The fact that they are both from Texas adds some home state propaganda value. If it all works out, Thompson could be a number three starter and Knebel a closer.

The Reds have been sub-.500 in each month this year except for June when they somehow turned in an 18-10. Now they find themselves missing both Votto & Brandon Phillips which obviously blows a big whole in their lineup. But even beyond that, they just plain look awful all around. I saw maybe 4 innings of them in the last week or so but it was enough to witness Chapman blow a game and their D drop at least three pop-ups.

Colon 4.6 Familia - 0.7 Mejia - 0.7 Wright - 1.5 Murphy - 1.0 EYoung - 1.0 Lagares - 0.5

Ryne benches Ryan -- Phils benched Ryan Howard - only for one game so far but with phrases coming from Sandberg like; 'it's all about putting the best team out there' and rumors that Phils mgmt are contemplating releasing Howard this winter even if it means eating the remaining (are you sitting down for this?) $60 million left on his deal (salaries for 2015 + 2016 + buyout), it sounds like this could become a semi-regular occurrence over the final 60-some games. Howard is MLB's highest paid position player this year. The Phils also made a series of smaller moves based mostly around re-activating Cliff Lee off the DL for his first action since May. Among those moves was the DFA Tony Gwynn Jr. Talk about a bad month for TGJ.

Texas closer Joakim Soria heads to Detroit for two pitching prospects: 1st round pick (39th overall) in 2013 Corey Knebel, and Jake Thompson (2nd round - 2012) Seems as if the Tiggers have spent this entire AL Central dominating run of theirs looking to solidify the back end of their bullpen. At the moment word is that Soria will set-up for Joe Nathan although it probably wouldn't take too much to nudge Nathan and his near-6.00 ERA and 1.5 WHiP out of the 9th inning. On the other hand, Soria's last act for the Rangers was blowing the save in the 13th inning against the Yanx late Tuesday night.

Wow, good work. Those odds: roughly 1-in-10 after 6, 1-in-4 thru 7, and 1-in-2 thru 8, are higher than I thought when this hit me during the game - although at the time I was thinking of PGs at the time rather than "merely" no-hitters.

A chart, or a graph, or just some stats, on the percentage of No-Hitters completed based on how deep an in-progress NH was. IOW, we know the pct of no-hitters among all games. I mean I don't know that off the top of my head, but it's a known quantity. So then starting with say the end of the 6th inning, what percentage of No-Nos that survive the 6th eventually go all the way? (quite small I'd imagine). And then what pct succeed when a No-no gets to 19 outs, then to 20, then 7 full innings (21), and so on up to what pct fail after 2 outs in the 9th? What triggered all this, quite obviously, is that I found myself wondering during today's game as my rational side (I know he's perfect thru 6 full - but that's still a looooonnng way from pay dirt) was locked in an argument with my romantic side (yeah but wouldn't it be cool if ....). I was even about to type something on the order of 'NOW it's Freakin' On' had Cano (freakin' party pooper) made an out to end the 7th. But even had Bartolo gotten to that point I was thinking, y'know, even with just 6 outs to go the odds were probably still, what, 1 in 50? ... more? ... less? I think you'd have to use no-hitters as your sample because there are just so few PGs, both the successful ones and the near misses, that the data would be so much less meaningful. I'm sure you'd need the folks at Elias to fetch up that stuff, but I'd like to see that kind of data and I don't think I've ever seen/heard anything like it.

Trying to preserve perfecto w/o a bone-a-fide SS ... gonna be interesting.

Got the strikeout shoes on today. Not Colon, but the rest of the team does.

Take two Kim Novaks and call me in the morning.

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: I don't feel like we're playing our very best at the moment .... Which EYJ proves by walking on 4 pitches to start the game - then getting picked off before a pitch is thrown to Muffy. He was called safe (but the M's are challenging) but even if the call stands (and it does) it's a lot of dumpth!

I also think a lot of fan's sense of prospects changed in the internet age - both for good and bad. The NYC newspapers and what passed for sports talk on other media back in the stone age, barely mentioned minor league ball or minor league players except to maybe tout some highly regarded "phenom" and even that has to go into quotes because because the information about him was as likely to be smokescreen planted by the club as it was an actual, unbiased opinion. Now the information is out there for all to see an analyze, but so is either misinformation or just shoddy opinions from someone with more bandwidth than actual knowledge. Looking at CF's lists above: * Victor Diaz (mostly pre-internet era) -- the main 'buzz' on him is that he had won a batting title at AA or something. But he had few other skills to fall back on so if the BA wasn't up ... * Justin Turner -- don't remember thinking of him as anything other than a utility player and certainly wasn't billed as such * Jae Seo -- one of the earlier far-east players so there was some sort of mystique about all that. His problem was that he was strictly a fastball/change-up pitcher who lost some mph off the fastball after an injury and was only briefly what the team hoped because of the lack of difference between the two pitches. * Dave Magadan (def pre-internet) -- I remember Kieth Hernandez saying that Magadan was going to be the #3 hitter after he (Keith) left NYM. But guys with little power, speed, or positional value to back it up have such a small margin for error. Nice career, just not a great one. * Jenrry Mejia -- lots of hype coming up through the system but also real young so fans get impatient (constant problem with Caribbean players). Then TJ surgery has a way of throwing a wrench into the works. * Carlos Gomez -- I already fessed up to blowing this one. I think a lot of people made the mistake of seeing the speed and trying to mold him into a slap-n-run hitter, Minnesota certainly did. I didn't see the defense either. * Kevin Mitchell -- was tailing off in the 2nd half of his rookie '86 season, but rookie seasons will do that to a guy. But even counting on a bounce-back from that I don't know if anyone saw an MVP in the future. * Jordany Valdespin -- his flair for the big moment obscured a lack of skills and discipline in some minds I'm sure. I personally never bought into him. Just called up by Miami btw * Dillon Gee -- I certainly think few saw the consistency and front of the rotation results that the last 12 months has produced. Now if he could only stay on the field * Alex Escobar -- a classic case of how the internet age info fooled a lot of people. He burst onto the prospect radar after a terrific year as a teenager [u:3a2e19n0]in low-A ball[/u:3a2e19n0]. He then missed an entire season and never quite got back to the same level. Problem was, most folks never took off that 'Top Prospect' label with him even though it was several years old and only briefly accurate by the time he was called up. * Jason Tyner -- I actually remember Peter Gammons lauding this pick. Not that he was predicting stardom or anything just that he thought it showed some ingenuity or something. Problem is, you can get away with being a Brett Butler type of hitter only if you can also play the ball-hawking CF[/i[ that Butler was at his best. Tyner, it turns out, was never either. * Ike Davis -- looked good for a while and was out-performing most of the other 1st basemen taken in that year's 1st round.