Frayed Knot

Centerfield wrote: Dilson Herrera was not in the same class as Alonso. That’s why no one cared. Dilson Herrera was a very different prospect than Alonso, but not necessarily a lesser one. By the winter after the trade Dilson has worked his way into the back/middle of some Top-100 prospect lists [bA = #46, BP = 82] something Alonso has yet to do. Now P.A. might wind up on some lists this coming winter which would make the two kind of comparable - except that Herrera was some 3-1/2 years younger at the time than Alsonso is now. And while that age gap may make Alonso more likely to stick permanently once called up, it also means he's probably already closer to his ceiling and that his first shot at being a FA can happen no earlier than the year he turns 30 (assuming no subsequent send-downs and no service time manipulations) or for his age 31 (or later) season if one or both of those occur (he'll turn 24 next week). One could argue that it would have made more sense to have diddled with Dilson's clock so as to not risk losing him following his age 26 year. But they didn't and, as is usually the case, it didn't matter - as it doesn't or won't for most prospects. Like I said, I happened to think about Dilson and his service time back in August when we were discussing the reason(s) for Alonso not being called up. I thought then, and think now, that his non-call had more more to do with 40-man roster issues and with Alonso issues (glove, K's, and just plain reps) than it did with how things might play out six or seven years down the road. Now obviously if Alonso is going to be at least our part-time 1st baseman this season then it makes sense to make the minor change of bringing him up in late April rather than starting on opening day. But a couple weeks delay is quite a different scenario than sitting on him for a half-season.

Just to be clear here: I don't want Cano. BUTT ... if absorbing Cano and his contract, giving us a bat who can absolutely help the lineup at least in the short run ('19 + '20?), lessens the price needed to get Diaz then it's a line worth exploring. Yeah, good closers can turn into shit closers but those odds are smaller for a guy with 1/4 the mileage on his arm and at maybe 1/3 the price as compared to buying one on the open market. The key is to be willing to walk away if the price gets too high. At times the problem in these big deals is that mgmt has seemingly decided before hand that they MUST get a certain player at which point there's almost no practical limit to what you're willing to offer. Victor Zambrano comes to mind (want Kazmir? ... Sure!!), as does the deal for Kris Benson. One of the great lessons laid out in 'MONEYBALL' was that it's easier to recover from the player you fail to sign than it is to recover from the signing you make at the wrong price. I know this is a trade we're talking about here but the same principle applies.

I was last thinking about Dilson back in August, right around the time we were first having discussions about delaying Peter Alonso's call-up date until May '19 so as to extend his window of team control yadda, yadda. And it occurred to me at the time that it was in August of 2014 when Herrera was first called up. Now I don't recall us having any discussions concerning manipulation of his ML service time -- he was, after all, considerably younger then than Alonso is now (in fact, Herrera is mere months older than Alonso) -- although maybe we were, but my point at the time with Alonso was that those cases where intentionally tinkered call-up dates wind up making a difference to the team are very much the exception rather than the rule and, as always, it's tough to know at the time which guys are the ones where it'll ultimately matter. Anyway, it's now four plus years later and Dilson Herrera is being claimed via waivers having acquired, in the interim, just one year plus 34 days of ML service time. IOW, rather than potentially being two years away from FA-gency as we discuss this he is in fact still two seasons (and they'll need to be mostly full ones) shy of even being arb-eligible and needing five more complete years before he can become a FA.

Do keep in mind that Diaz will cost the Mets less in salary for the sum of the four years they'd have him under control than will one, maybe one-plus, seasons of Kimbrel (and you'd have to commit to more than that) - so, if nothing else, that leaves munny available for other purposes. And, yes, you'd have to factor in what Cano will cost, etc. (not going to do any of that now as there are too many moving parts to this - including the part about whether or not any of this is real). But the larger point is that buying closers on the open market hasn't always proven to be a good, or cost-effective, way to go so I understand their thought process here. The details, as they always are, will be the deciding factor as to whether or not this is a good idea.

HahnSolo wrote: This move has Omar's fingerprints all over it. Throw in a few more prospects and it'll have Steve Phillips' fingerprints all over it.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: If I visit that website, will my hair look exactly like hers? Mine already does so I don't need to visit.

Just to be clear here, your version of keeping a "healthy Cespedes from being overused", and of "keeping Frazier involved" for that matter, has both of them sitting out some 70-80% of the time. I don't think that's gonna fly.

I remember the commercial, not the song.

Well, the problem at the root of all this is not having a true CF'er. That's a problem that needs to be solved by I don't solve it by making the two best hitters on the team into part-time players. So I certainly don't add Mallex Smith with the intention of making him a full-time player if the net result is going to be that each one of his ABs takes one away from either Conforto and/or (second-half) Cespedes. That's a downgrade rather than a solution even if it turns out that Smith one good (semi-full time 2018) season really does show who he's going to be from here on out. Plus I'm not even sure how good a defensive CF he is. We tend to make assumptions that slappy/speedy guys make good CF gloves but that's not always the case and Smith has always split his time between CF and a corner spot. Maybe that was due to other personnel on the teams he was on, or maybe it's because he's merely OK there which, if so, isn't really an upgrade from what Nimmo & Conforto can do.

You don't want Cespedes OR Conforto to be platoon players - and certainly not in one with each other!!

Checking in on Edwin Diaz here since us east coasters rarely ever see west coast closers due to the fact that they generally don't even start their stretching routines until after midnight EDT: - native of Puerto Rico, was drafted in the 3rd round by Seattle in 2012 - will turn 25 during spring training '19 - has two-plus years ML service time but remains short of arbitration status until next season - was 5th in AL RoY in 2016; 49 appearances all in relief, 23 games finished, 18 saves. So they threw him into the fire fairly quickly as he made his ML debut in June that year, was assigned to 7th & 8th inning spots immediately, and was closing by early August. Kimbrel started closing that quickly, but not a lot of others that I can think of (K-Rod). - 1st full season ('17) 66 games, 52 GF, 34 saves, 3.27 ERA, 1.15 WHIP - 2018: 73 G/73.1 IP; 65 GF which led the league as did his 57 saves; 41 Hits, 1.96 ERA, 0.79 WHIP. 5.0 H/9, 0.6 HR/9, 2.1 BB/9, 15.2 K/9. So that's >3 Ks for every hit. He was an All Star, 8th in CY, 18th in MVP One interesting note on the 2018 Mariners, who were in the chase for a long while but faded to 3rd in the AL West: they won 89 games but were out-scored by 34 runs overall which their pythag projection puts them at just 77 wins. Sometimes a good bullpen can help out that kind of result although a +12 win differential is pretty radical. So maybe GM Jerry DiPoto knows 2018 was a bit of fool's gold and is looking to cash out. So, if some sort of this deal goes through, you've got your theoretical closer for the next four years, the first of them quite cheap, from ages 25 thru 28

#8 -- Find out who keeps putting empty soda cans in the bin designated for paper and cardboard recycling

seawolf17 wrote: Hmm. Wikipedia wrote: In December 2013, Van Wagenen negotiated a $240 million, 10-year contract for Robinson Canó with the Seattle Mariners. So, basically, BVW is telling Seattle, 'Hey, if we make this trade then you're gonna have to eat most of the money here cuz I'm sure not going to take on the back years of that idiot deal'

Eleven Areas of concern for Brodie to concentrate on: #1 -- Better drink selection in the CitiField employee cafeteria

Nymr83 wrote: He isnt "can't miss" but I like his chances better than Smith at this point How much of that is the 'backup quarterback syndrome'? " and want to see what he has." -- Sure. I just don't think it's been established that he's already earned a call-up the minute he's no longer eligible for a full season in 2019 "strikeouts are overrated, they are just outs." -- The jump from his (already somewhat high) rate in AA to the one in AAA causes me some concern. Where's it going to be against the next level of pitching?

I also forget the exact source but remember hearing that story. Rickey's point was that this bonus was going to mean a lot more to the lives of the marginal player (or non-player) than the slightly reduced portion due to slicing the pie into more pieces was going to mean to the established guys. Plus it just looks bad, especially so now that this kind of thing doesn't stay secret these days.

Or until, y'know, he maybe cuts down a bit on the 30+% strikeout rate that he racked up while in Vegas last season: 78 times in 258 ABs; 22.7% in Bingo (50 in 220) At the risk of repeating myself, I fear that the general consensus here has convinced themselves that Alonso is a can't-miss and/or an already finished product, and I'm not sure he's either right now.

Hard to say as you can see Donaldson's 2019 going in either direction. He turns 34 next week, is coming off a year with <200 ABs, and will be four seasons removed from his MVP year and two since his last 500 PA year at this point. On the other hand, is real good when healthy. That the Mets were in on him at all shows they -- and specifically Todd Frazier's recent agent -- are willing to do ... Something with Frazier although I don't know what. Trade? Move to 1B? Reduce his time? You certainly wouldn't think they'd just sit him. As for the Braves: 'Hey 24 y/o Johan Camargo!, thanks for the 3.7 WAR -- best on team behind Freddie and the two children (Acuna & Albies) -- and for the 116 OPS+, but we got other plans'.

The Yanx, and specifically player rep David Robertson, get called out for bypassing team employees when it came to divvying up post-season money. A table shows them as awarding 45 full shares, a number that's anywhere between 11 and 23 fewer full shares than the other 2018 playoff teams and 11 fewer than they awarded last season when their piece of the pie was larger due to getting one round further in. What interests me most in this piece isn't specifically the number of shares -- although that it has them leaving out "the team’s entire support staff, trainers, clubhouse attendants and BP pitchers" certainly says something even if we'll never know all the circumstances behind it all -- but the fact that it's the NYDN doing the calling. The 'Snooze' over the last number of years is more often seen as the in-house magazine of everything pinstriped and here they seem to go out of their way to throw in some nasty wording: "Greedy", "Cheapskates", "Stiffing", etc. The piece is attributed to 'The Daily News Sports Staff' rather than to any one writer - although Bill Madden's name is mentioned briefly. I wonder if that's so Cashman and the Steinbrenners won't know who specifically to retaliate against and so that Madden (plus whatever other 'Name' guy is still left over there) can claim not to have all the blood on their hands here.

Mex17 wrote: Ironically, Veeck was the same guy who did this. . . https://baseballhall.org/discover-more/stories/inside-pitch/grandstand-managers-night Not only that, but Veeck DID used to show up in the Wrigley bleachers every once in a while and sit with the fans, talking baseball, quaffing beers, and grinding out cigarette stubs into his wooden leg along the way. The line may or may not have come from Veeck, I can't really remember now. But its point holds that if you make moves with your mind too focused on the public relations aspect of it you often wind up with a worse pr image than you would have had you concentrated more on making, at least in your mind, the 'right' move. And during the Wilpons' tenure, this trap has been sprung more than a few times.

Fman99 wrote: I think trading him for anything less than one of the 10-15 best hitters in baseball would be a tragic error. It would depend on what they think the odds are of a prospect like Senzel turning into the next Alex Bregman, a comparison I use because there are a decent amount of similarities. - they play the same position and were both #2 overall draft picks out of major college programs in the same conference (LSU & Tenn). - Senzel out-hit Bregman as a minor leaguer [904 OPS vs 866] and was the higher rated prospect along the way although Bregman was moved faster and already had a partial ML season under his belt by the time he was Senzel's age now Bregman has now, of course, turned into a monster by his third overall (second full) ML season [.286/.394/.509] and that's a tough standard to hope to replicate, but something even remotely similar would be terrific. Dealing Thor for a guy who's "top 10-15 hitter" now would net us one who is likely come with two or three years of team control just as he would for his new team. That's maybe the safer/less-downside move but, depending on how well they can read the lay of the land, not always the better one.

I guess the only potential knock on Halladay was his short-ish prime. Called up at age 21 but didn't break through until age 26. Then, after a brief stumble, was great for a string but had his final good season at age 34 after only eight total seasons as a full-time starter (30+ starts) plus just two other seasons of over 20 Helluva prime though.

Mex17 wrote: That sort of thing may be an even swap and it may even turn out to be a great trade in the end, but I'm not certain that the fanbase will accept it at the onset. You would be moving Syndergaard for a closer from a 2nd division team who no one knows the name of along with a prospect. It might be a tough sell to folks who, if they are accepting of a Syndergaard trade at all, want to see a real headline grabbing blockbuster. "Syndergaard for Springer!!" "Syndergaard for Bryant!!" The fan base would be best judging this trade (or any trade) on its merits alone rather than for the headlines and/or the insta-buzz it would give. And the front office would be even dopier for making, or failing to make, a deal based on those kinds of perceptions. If it's the right deal, do it! Lots of great trades weren't liked at the time and some were opening mocked. Ask Yanqui fans if they want to go back and un-do the Gerald Williams for Paul O'Neill deal (or sub-in Bernie Williams instead) because they sure did at the time. There was an old line attributed, I believe, to Bill Veeck, that if you listen to the fans you wind up sitting with them.

One Syndergaard rumor -- and by rumor I mean someone (Anthony Castrovince at mlb.com in this case) making stuff up because it might be the type of trade that could work for both sides -- is to Cincy for Raisel Iglesias and Nick Senzel Iglesias was Cincy's Opening Day starter back in 2016 though has pretty much been a reliever since and the Reds primary closer over the last two-plus seasons (58 saves in 2017 + 18) A Cuban signed in 2015 and who'll turn 29 just after New Year's, the Reds just this week signed him to an arbitration-years contract which will take him/them through 2021 at about $8 mil/per. Whether that means they're more likely to deal him or less likely is anyone's guess. Senzel is their top prospect and one of the best in all of baseball -- MLB, BA, & BP all had him at #7 last winter A 23 y/o out of Knoxville, TN and the 2nd overall pick in 2016 out of U-Tenn, the 3Bman (and sometimes 2B) was doing nothing to dim his rep this season [hitting .310/.378/.509 at AAA Louisville] until a busted thumb curtailed his 2018 season at just under 200 ABs and possibly delayed his ML debut as well. From John Sickels (on 11/21): Grade A/A-: hit .310/.378/.509 with six homers, 19 walks, 38 strikeouts, eight steals in 171 at-bats in Triple-A until season ended early due to broken finger; also missed time with vertigo; bat looks MLB-ready, hits for power, hits for average, controls the strike zone, no clear weaknesses; can steal some bases, too; also adapted well to playing second base, shifting over from third; only thing that worries me is the vertigo issue; ETA 2019. Be a nice bookend on either side of Rosario Make of all that what you want. Again, there's nothing to indicate that this is even under discussion but it's the type of trade that could work and I think probably a reasonable haul to expect. It's then just a question of whether either side might want it to work. Reds, due to their ballpark, have a tough time luring pitching to them and their more promising drafted guys either haven't worked out (Homer Bailey) or have yet to work out (Robert Stephenson) For the Mets it (hopefully) fills two holes at the expense of creating one.

And Papelbon pretty much started it ... at least the physical part of the altercation. We can only imagine what was said leading up to it.