Frayed Knot

Various questions/observations: 1) Who's 'Thor'? Nieuwenhuis? Problem is I don't think he's got much trade value. Most of the guys we're talking about here are younger than him (or den Dekker) and have a better pedigree. 2) Nick Franklin - former 1st round draft pick (and one-time star for the Clinton LumberKings) Generally when guys get moved off of SS, particularly as young as age 22, it's for a good reason. Like we were saying in the Eric Young thread: If you [u:v2kd1xjt]can[/u:v2kd1xjt] play SS they'd be playing you at SS. Franklin, unlike Young, at least has so he might be usable there, although maybe not as a full-timer going forward. 3) Dustin Ackley -- former [u:v2kd1xjt]#2 overall[/u:v2kd1xjt] draft pick out of UNC (where he would have crossed paths with Harvey) Has fallen short of expectations since that high draft spot. Always seemed like a bit of a 'tweener' to me, someone the Ms weren't sure was an IF or an OF and, stuck between being a average guy and a power guy, has become not much of either.

I don't think I had ever heard even about the existence of Tom's brother Charles, much less of his early-ish (55) death. IIRC, their father, also Charles, lived into his 90s meaning he probably out-lived Charles Jr. - and jeez that's a pattern I'm finding all too common lately.

Bartolo Colon is sooooo fat (and old) ... that the Mets only signed him to a two-year contract.

[from that link] According to Bob Nightengale of USA Today, the Mariners are letting teams know that Jesus Montero and Justin Smoak are available in trades. I'd rather have Smoak - even though neither has lived up to predicted levels thus far. Montero is younger but has almost zero athleticism to add anything beyond his hitting. On the other hand, we're trying to reduce 1st basemen at this point, not add to them. In any case I'm not sure what we'd have to trade to get either of them; young pitching most likely and is that really what we want to spend in order to replace our current 1B question marks with different 1B question marks?

When he pitches in domes, Bartolo says to his fellow players: 'Is it claustrophobic in here or is it just me?'

I was hoping we drafted him so he could be flipped to Denmark in exchange for a Prime Minister to be named later.

I don't think they should ban collisions, only those where the catcher is giving the runner a path to the base. A catcher without the ball leaves himself open to being run into AND should be flagged for obstruction. A catcher WITH the ball who is in front of the plate leaves the runner no option but to run into him, run around him, or essentially give up. But having the ball before the runner gets there also gives the catcher enough time to choose how he wants to handle things, and where catchers get into trouble is when they try to have things both ways (and the part of this that doesn't stem from concussion concerns stems from the Posey injury of two years back where he did just that) by catching the ball and blocking the plate at the same time, thereby leaving themselves open to getting steamrolled.

MFS62 wrote: MFS62 wrote: If they trade one of their arbitration eligible players for someone cheaper, the cash difference goes into that pot. Again, this presumes that the payroll figure is a set, specific amount, No, it doesn't presume anything. If you trade away a $5 million/yr player and get a $2 million/yr player, you now have more money to spend. It is mathematically true whether there is a limit or not. My objection is with the presumption that a certain amount of money saved on one player or transaction automatically results in an adjustment in the payroll total by that same amount. But things aren't that simple which, when added to this notion that we all know the exact amount of the total payroll, leads to bad conclusions.

MFS62 wrote: If they trade one of their arbitration eligible players for someone cheaper, the cash difference goes into that pot. Again, this presumes that the payroll figure is a set, specific amount, something which generally isn't the case and Sandy has repeatedly said isn't accurate is this case. Of course there's a budget and there's a limit at some point, but the whole premise of this thread pre-supposes the idea that there's not only an exact limit that needs to be balanced but that we all know specifically what it is and so by manipulating our personal spreadsheets we can figure out how to move players around the chess board. If that's what you like to do then go for it, but I think you're wasting your time by pretending we know all the facts.

The details of how the ban would work have yet to be announced. And as usual (quicker games, expanded replay) instead of figuring out what to do and then announcing it, MLB oddly decides to do things the other way around. I'd be in favor of a simple rule where a catcher allowing the runner an unimpeded path to the plate is off-limits to be hit while one who chooses to stand in the way without the ball is both subject to obstruction rules and liable to be run over by a large man with a head of steam behind him. This way it would be up to the individual catchers and teams to decide how they want to play it. I'm not totally sure why the league figures that they have to protect the players from themselves.

Maybe I'll be surprised here, but in the end I expect to wish they had put a full-stop on this instead of a Colon.

At the team mandated physical, both his blood pressure and chlorlestoral level figures had commas in them.

This whole math equation presumes that you (we, media folks, etc.) know what the precise budget restrictions are. Any such numbers that are or have been tossed around are not only not specific limits as stated from the club but are probably closer to guesstimates than they are to estimates. The club will spend either what they can spend or what they feel they should spend given the options available. Why fans feel the need to know in advance what the specific number is continues to elude me.

Yes, neither you, nor anyone else I know, is stating that we must keep both, just as I'm not saying that we can't keep both. So to state my Ike/Lucas philosophy as clearly as possible so as to maybe wrap this up and to avoid the specter of a thread-long parsing contest: * To those who say that we shouldn't trade one of the other unless we get in return either a solid starter at another position or a good young prospect --- my answer would be that neither ID or LD themselves qualify as solid starters at the moment; nor do either have their stats going in the right direction; nor have either shown any particular knack for staying healthy; nor are either young enough (27 & 28 by ST) to be considered up-and-comers themselves anymore. Yeah, I'd like to get a haul for either one of them too, I just don't think it's going to happen. * To the idea that we can/should keep both so as to back up each other and/or spur on each other --- I'd prefer to use that redundancy as trade bait so as to shore up a different position, of which we have several. * To the part about simply stashing Duda in AAA --- the team has recently picked up one player with similar type age & skills, and has another with 1-1/2 seasons of AA under his belt with a performance last year that merits at least a one-step promotion so there'd also be some redundancy with that strategy as well. I also suspect that hanging onto both with the idea that their trade value might rise in the future is that it's at least as likely to go the other way.

I wonder what Dice-K will wind up with contract-wise because I would have gone that route instead of Colon, especially with the second year, but maybe that's just because I have a prejudice against old, fat ballplayers. Tough to argue with what he's done over the past two seasons although it does get a bit easier if you look at the couple of campaigns prior to those and prior to when he was taking PEDs.

You're gonna need a bigger uniform

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I know it's probably not the wisest move, but I'd kinda like to see Sandy drive up the market for Davis and Duda by signing Loney, thereby removing him as an option for the Brewers, the Rays, and whoever else. The only problem with that theory is that you then put yourself in the position where everyone knows you have to trade your guy - thereby increasing the odds that you'd be driving down the price you'd get for him instead of raising it. And that's also part of the problem with the 'Keep Both' school of thinking. Didn't we just recently pick-up as low-BA/hi-Slg type of 1st sacker to go along with the already crowded Duda + Davis + Allen Dykstra trio? There used to be a rule, I don't know if it's still in effect, that said that a newly signed free agent couldn't be traded until June 1 (or July 1?) of his first year with his new team. Without said player's permission, yes.

I remember Bobby V specifically talking about Iguchi around the time of the first of his two good seasons with the ChiSox (after which his game fell off a cliff) that, back in Japan, there wasn't a question in anyone's mind that Matsui was the better player and that he had no explanation for why the seemingly lesser player had the better (albeit temporary) success over here.

Centerfield wrote: No way I trade either for a guy I know will be a bench player, even a good one. Maybe that is setting the standard a bit too low -- but at the moment we're not sure that whoever turns out to be the better of these two will qualify as much more than a decent bench player and maybe neither will. All's I'm saying is that I'd prefer to have one of these guys plus a mediocre player who plays a different position and brings a different set of skills rather than two similar mediocre guys.

I think they made the deal thinking they were getting a plus player on offense - and theirs was hardly the opinion that thought so. Sure it was probably more top-driven than we knew at the time with an eye towards marketing angles but they thought they were getting a ballplayer too and Bobby, if he were still there, gave every indication that he would have been on board for it as well. And while it's easy to say that setting him up at SS was a mistake, he wouldn't have come over otherwise. So, yeah, bad result, and the powers at be were probably a bit too desperate to want it to work, but almost certainly somebody would have signed him based strictly on baseball potential and probably for similar money.

Edgy MD wrote: Well, when they play poorly, they're similar. When they excel, they're a little different. Not very different. ID career per/600 ABs -- .242/.334/.434 // 768; 30 2Bs, 1 3B, 25 HRs in 1,711 ML ABs LD career per/600 ABs -- .246/.342/.424 // 766; 27 2Bs, 1 3B, 20 HRs in 1,282 ML ABs Ike had the better peak the year he hit 32 HRs, but both have seen their BA & OBA tumble every year since 2011 BA = .302 ... then .227 ... then .205 for Ike vs .292 ... .239 ... .223 (Duda) But being similar isn't an issue as far as I'm concerned. Getting good play out of at least one of them is the issue. And that's less likely if they deal one away. You also have (theoretically) one fewer hole elsewhere by dealing either/or as opposed to redundancy at one spot with two guys who may both be out of options at this point(?) and will turn 27 & 28 y/o (Lucas is 13 months older) before the season starts. Is the hope that keeping both will light a fire under one or the other really that high (after all - it hasn't worked so far) to justify burning a roster spot with two guys who essentially have the same strengths and weaknesses. I don't want to dump either one just to dump them, but if I'm Sandy I'm turning over every rock to see what I can find in a SS, a prospect, a pitcher, or even a good bench player in exchange.

A coworker was at an event for our firm today where Derek Jeter was a guest of honor. My coworker was at a table with a guy who started having a heart attack, called 911, and stuffed some advil down this guys throat. Jeter came down to assess the situation, shot a "how you doin'?" at my coworker, who happens to be an attractive 40 something blonde, and cheers the potentially dead guy back to life with his charms. So if I've got this straight, a guy starts having a heart attack so Jeter uses the occasion to chat-up the victim's shapely, blonde table-mate ... and somehow out of all this Saint Derek gets the credit for the guy not dying?!?

Well, Santiago + a PtbNL, a guy who could be great, filler, or anywhere in between.

Also neglected to include StL pitcher Chris Carpenter He said during this past season that he was going to retire as he recovered from yet another injury. He and Halladay are pals (IIRC) so maybe they timed this so as to go huntin' and fishin' together year round. Also Mark Prior - speaking of never-ending pitcher injuries - is finally giving up the chase.

From DBacks to Angels -- LHP Tyler Skaggs From DBAcks to ChiSox -- OF Adam Eaton To DBacks -- LAA slugger Mark Trumbo (95 HRs over last three seasons) plus two PtbNLs, one from Angels, one from White Sox From ChiSox to Angels -- LHP Hector Santiago Skaggs was originally a 1st round (40th overall - 2009) draft pick of the Angels before being sent to Arizona to complete the Dan Haren deal in August 2010. He now goes back to LAA