Frayed Knot

This movie just came on an award-season re-release to a theatre near me so I recently got around to checking it out. First thing I notice is that the Tom Hanks in that promo poster (above) looks about 10, if not 15, years younger than the Tom Hanks who was in the movie. TH is not a young man anymore and apparently air-brushing is no longer just for aging actresses. (looking it up) the real James Donovan was 41 y/o when he defended Rudolf Abel, 46 when he went on the mission to trade for Lt. Powers, and was dead by the age of 53, more than half a decade before reaching Hanks's current age of 59. Not that that's a major flaw in the movie or anything, more like standard operating procedure in Hollywood casting. Would probably fall somewhere in the middle of my (now 13 titles long) list of 2015 releases. Some suspense in the plot even as it built towards a not very suspenseful conclusion; a very good snapshot, I thought, of Berlin at the height of cold war tensions with the almost comical (although not particularly funny) portrayal of the suffocating layers of bureaucracy and paranoia of the Soviet/satellite state in that era. Interesting at times but not necessarily gripping. Third thought is that the idea (probably even the betting favorite) of Sylvester Stallone winning a best supporting actor trophy over this English actor Mark Rylance who played the Russian Abel would be a true travesty of justice if such a phrase can even be assigned to a silly awards show.

Doug Fister signs a one year deal with the Astros. Rox trade OF Corey Dickerson to Tampa for pitcher Jake McGee, plus a minor leaguer going each way.

Terry reveals his "most likely" line-up (subject to change of course) to the NYPost. 1. Curtis Granderson, RF 2. David Wright, 3B 3. Yoenis Cespedes, CF 4. Lucas Duda, 1B 5. Neil Walker, 2B 6. Michael Conforto, LF 7. Travis d’Arnaud, C 8. Asdrubal Cabrera, SS 9. Pitcher

Seo's problem was that he was a fastball/change-up pitcher who, after arm surgery, lost a bit off the fastball and therefore the difference in speed between the two pitches. Given that, I'm actually surprised he was still pitching up until now with at least periods of success. You also have to love statements like: "the right-hander said he wanted to open up more opportunities for younger players". Sure he does.

Of course he did. And he may actually mean it.

Mets – Willets Point wrote: I can't believe Yusmiero Petit is still around. I think maybe even HE's surprised. For a guy who barely had a career from 2006-09, then disappeared entirely into the minors and foreign leagues for 2010, '11, and effectively 2012 as well (only 4-2/3 ML innings pitched), he then resurfaced with the Giants in late 2013 only to have several oddly effective seasons since as a combo reliever/starter including a scoreless streak which reached a near record length* in 2014 but also flew largely under the radar because it accumulated in just 1 and 2 innings clumps over many different appearances. And he still just turned 31 y/o over this past off-season. Signed w/the Nats at a fairly cheap rate ($3 mil) for one year plus an option which kicks in for 2017 at the same price if he hits 80 innings pitched. * actually (looking it up) he DID set a record when he retired 46 consecutive batters from July 22 thru Aug 28, 2014 - the equivalent of 15-1/3 innings of perfect pitching which occurred across eight separate outings.

Centerfield wrote: They're not going to have a catcher? Nice! We're going to win this thing easy! Think of the running we can do after all the passed balls!! Actually they should have the same duo of Wilson Ramos & Jose Lobaton back. Ramos is going to be an interesting decision for them this year. They got him as a 22 y/o via a trade w/the Twins where he was being blocked by Joe Mauer (not even a catcher anymore) for a reliever (Matt Capps) now four years out of the game, he's been a solid catcher and powerful bat for them and is still just 28. But he misses so many games due to injury (averaged barely 300 ABs/year over five seasons) that he plays sometimes more like he's 38 and can be a FA at the end of the year. I think they also like Lobaton better defensively but the guy hits like he's a backup catcher or something!

Hmmmmm, interesting call for them. I suspect they think both guys would be better at 3rd. Rendon's the incumbent and kind of the 'chosen one' (after Harper) and I think they'd prefer to keep him out of harm's way. Murphy is older (read: less mobile) and has the big, new contract although I doubt he had the kind of pull to demand a position in negotiations. Drew probably plays best at 2B or SS so would be a more logical late-inning replacement for Murph if he's at 2nd without having to reshuffle the entire infield. Espinosa can back up pretty much anywhere.

Six ballots cast so far. We'll leave about two more weeks for anyone else who wants to chime in or for those already submitting to update or argue their positions.

Know your 2016 Nats (as of 1/27): Rotation: Out from last year are Jordan Zimmermann & Doug Fister. To replace them, 2014 starter Tanner Roark bounces back from pen to reclaim a starting job, and Joe Ross, originally a 1st round pick by the Padres dealt to the Nats last winter. He pitched for the Nats part of last year including two starts vs the NYM during last year's crunch-time series [12.2 IP, 5 runs, 8 hits] Those two will join incumbents: Strasburg, Scherzer, and (LH) Gio Gonzalez Bullpen: Papelbon hasn't been dealt (at least not yet anyway) and Aaron Barrett & Blake Treinan also return. But Drew Storen, Felipe Rivera, Casey Janssen, and LOOGY specialist Matt Thorton have either been traded or left via FA-gency. Newcomers in the pen include a couple of guys with NYM connections: Oliver Perez, Yusmeiro Petit. Also Trevor Gott acquired from the Angels plus an assortment of young guys from their own org round out the pen as of now. On the infield they're dealing with the loss of Ian Desmond (who still hasn't signed anywhere!!) and Yunel Escobar from whom they got a lot more than they had any right to expect in 2015. 1B - Ryan Zimmerman back by Clint Robinson, the 30 y/o rookie with a surprisingly strong 2015 2B - some guy they picked up in the off season SS - This is the only real open position. They'd like speed-burner/former 1st round pick (by SD) Trea Turner to win the job. If he's not ready they signed Stephen Drew and still have utility knife IF Danny Espinosa (both of whom will probably replace Muffy in late innings often) 3B - Anthony Rendon OF - Jayson Werth in LF. Ben Revere was imported to replace the better, though more-oft injured, Denard Span both in the leadoff spot and in CF. MVP Bryce Harper in RF. Michael Taylor and/or Matt den Dekker will back up at all three spots - particularly for Werth who is increasingly a liability with a glove on his hand. And finally there's the massively experienced Dusty Baker in for first-timer Matt Williams to run the dugout.

I never did hear the results of Bartolo's physical after his signing. I'd hate for them to discover that he got out of shape over the winter.

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Since we're fantasizing anyway, why not tweak the rule so that rosters expand to 27, but a team may not carry more than, say, 13 players that are eligible to pitch? Then carve out an exception for blow-outs, so that if a team trails by x runs after y innings, a position player may pitch. That's the logical alternative: to adopt an NHL style rule of a larger (28?) roster but have only 25 active for any given game. The only problem is that you'd need some fairly complicated set of conditions in order to have teams not simply put the most recent three starting pitchers on the inactive list each time allowing them to carry 16 in the bullpen. I'd prefer to stick with 25, but if it'll take going to 26, or to a 27/25 type of situation (above), to get rid of the DH then I'd back roster expansion.

It would be even worse the other way. If they ever decided to trash it there would have to be something like a 10 year lead-up period to allow all the contracts (Pujols, Fielder, etc.) to run their course.

Sounds to me like Manfred has since heard from from several owners/GMs who gave him a "not so fast" response after his original riffing off the comments from Mozeliak that momentum was shifting towards universal acceptance. Or at least that's my interpretation of what happened and I'm sticking to it.

Centerfield wrote: I think Mex's question was why 4 years for Zobrist, but not for Cespedes. And I thought that was what I answered. "My guess is that the 4 years for Zobrist was fueled by PR (above)" --- I'm willing to give Sandy the benefit of the doubt that any move he gives his stamp of approval to is one that he thinks is best for the team and doesn't get caught up in pr moves just to replace one name with another (Coleman for Strawberry for ex.). Doesn't mean they always will work out but I believe they're with the best of intentions. " and they didn't go 4 years on Cespedes because they realized at some point that they didn't have to. Once they decided that they were in on Cespedes, they played it perfectly." --- Except that they can't have known that a 3-year deal was enough at a time when there was a supposed four (or was it five?) year deal out there, and from a division opponent no less. All indications are that the Mets simply did not want to go more than three for Cespedes and I believe were willing to walk away had he insisted. "I get what you are saying about Conforto versus Herrera. I would counter that even though he is younger, he's had nearly 2000 professional PA's and he's hit at every level. That's why I distinguish him from say, Amed Rosario, who is just potential but no actual results. Look, he may end up sucking, but he has nothing more to prove at AAA and I think he deserves a shot. I'm glad that they brought in a short-term solution." --- And I'm fine with it too, I just don't think you make moves (or not) based on having Dilson Herrera in your system. I wouldn't do it for Rosario either although having a reported legit SS glove potentially sets his ceiling higher than that of an easier to find or replace 2B prospect. But that discussion is at least a year away.

Centerfield wrote: Frayed Knot wrote: I would describe scouts as being intrigued by Herrera, based mostly on his age and power potential in a middle infield spot. But he's hardly the kind of sure thing that you arrange your ML roster around, especially how we know that even can't-miss prospects can and do miss. Compared to him (and to Cecchini and to Rosario) Conforto and Lagares are MUCH more proven at this point. Really? Much more proven? Conforto has 25 more AB's than Herrera (174 total). This is hardly enough time to prove anything. Not just more ML ABs but more success at the ML level [841 OPS vs 690]. Also MC is older, came out of a major college program, 1st round pick, went quickly through the minors, etc. IOW, he's closer to knowing what he'll be as compared to Herrera who's still young and still very much much a work in progress. He may be a good major leaguer in a year or three but that's hardly a given. Not that Conforto's a given either but, yeah, I'd call him the much better bet at this point. Don't fall victim to the grass is greener syndrome with prospects. You may not love Lagares but most prospects will never get to where he is now at age 26. You're basically saying Conforto is "much more proven" after 174 AB's. So much so that you give him the starting job and forego all the other options available in free agency, even though the best hitters available are corner outfielders. But with Herrera, he is "still only a maybe" after 149 AB's. And so you give a 35 year old a 4 year contract at 2B. Look, I'm not arguing that I would have preferred the Zobrist deal as reported over the Cespedes deal; I'm in fact quite happy with the ways things turned out. Mex asked why the team was willing to go longer for Zobrist than for Cespedes and I gave what I thought was their reasoning. Also remember that it's not like Zobrist x 4 vs Cespedes x 3 was a known choice at the same time. I suspect they never thought YC's price/length would come down to where it did and neither did anyone else. When it did, they jumped. But, yes, I do think it's reasonable to say (and this is kind of already plowed ground here) that, because there were three OFs already under contract and capable of starting, focusing on a guy who would play the open hold at 2B while also being capable of playing almost everywhere else (1B, SS, 3B, corner OF) when/if necessary was a reasonable option. And, no, I don't think that teams who view themselves as in contention should make plans or pass on present options with the idea that the path has to be kept open for a 21 y/o prospect who might crack the back half of the top-100 lists this winter.

I would describe scouts as being intrigued by Herrera, based mostly on his age and power potential in a middle infield spot. But he's hardly the kind of sure thing that you arrange your ML roster around, especially how we know that even can't-miss prospects can and do miss. Compared to him (and to Cecchini and to Rosario) Conforto and Lagares are MUCH more proven at this point.

- Herrera is still only a maybe as opposed to Conforto & Lagares who are older and already proven (to one degree or another) major leaguers. - Ditto Cecchini & Rosario; Zobrist was never going to be a starting SS anyway, but someone who can fill-in at that spot has increased value. His signing probably makes the Cabrera one unnecessary - Nor was he going to be signed to play 3B full-time but he can if needed and we know the full-time guy there is going to require relief - yes, his bat would work in the OF. Like I said, a very similar OPS to Cespedes over the last few years.

Two words (which double as a blast from the past): 'Better Fit' I believe they saw Zobrist as one with: - maybe the lower ceiling as compared to Yo but also a higher floor; his OBP skills giving him the better OPS for most of his career as compared to the more erratic Cespedes - versatility. Zobrist had a position vacated specifically for him (2B) and could fill in at multiple others as opposed to Cespedes whose best slot is already filled with the promising rookie and will instead bump the other young OF to the bench

Lefty Specialist wrote: I think both Sandy and the Wilpons look at this as a one-year deal. Maybe. But between the dollar figures being so high (it's the highest AAV of any position player aside from Miggy Cabrera) and the deal only slightly front-loaded, the idea that Yo is bailing after year one is hardly a sure thing. IOW, one has to hope that the team is prepared for at least the possibility of living with this deal for the full three seasons.

Yes, that's the way I should have phrased it. Each newly signed FA gets, in effect, 1/2 of a season of veto power over any trade. After that it's open season on all those who don't have a more extensive no-trade clause written into their particular deal. Cespedes, btw, has full N-T power over the life of this new three-year deal. He can "trade" himself after year one, but the team can't.

I come not to praise Wilpons here but merely to remind folks that one of the reasons I don't like playing accountant here is that we don't always know what we think we know. So after all the speculations and often flat-out statements, here and elsewhere, about what they could not or would not spend; about how Cespedes was not sign-able since he was only brought in the first place due to recouping of Wright's insurance money, or that he couldn't be added due to Lagares's contract, etc. ... since the close of business in October they've added (2016 numbers): Cespedes @ $27.5 Walker at an arb-to-be-determined 9.4 - 11.8 Cabrera at 8.25 de Aza at 5.75 Bastardo at 5.5 Reed at 5.3 (about 4.5 of that is over their pro-rated portion of his 2015 salary) plus arb bumps for Harvey & Familia at approx 3.5 each (on top of minor adjustments for others) and a built-in bump of 2 mil for Lagares at the reduction of only Niese's 7 mil, Murphy's 8, some portion of Cuddyer's 8.5 (there was apparently some buyout agreed to), and a 3.75 mil reduction in Colon's salary

Mex is right in the sense that what players with options usually want in a renegotiation is to tack-on years to their deal rather than to merely up the per/year money on seasons already negotiated. It's too bad for Yo but the fact is that he loses a little bit from having been stuck in Cuba when other players were able to start their clock earlier. Yeah, but then he also got to use his FA status coming into MLB to force his way to FA-gency after just four seasons instead of having to wait six so that partially makes up for it. Upton simply came up younger than almost anyone (foreign or American) so he gets to be a younger FA than most too. And just wait three years for Harper, Bryce: he'll hit the FA market just two weeks after turning 26, nearly two and a half years younger than J Upton is now and only about six months older than A. Rodriguez back when he signed his deal w/Texas.

bmfc1 wrote: Just asking: can the Mets trade de Aza (i.e., can you trade a player who you just signed as a Free Agent)? Unless the rules have been recently changed, there's a mid-season rule against trading a guy you just inked as a FA. So, no they can't, until at least July 1st I believe is the date.

dArnaud and/or Plawecki getting some reps at 1B (or a different position for that matter) is a good idea independent of the Cespedes signing. But I don't expect either to be the first choice in backing up Duda; Flores, Walker, and maybe even Wright would likely be ahead of the catching duo on that front. The gap in pay between year 1 and years 2 & 3 of the Cespedes deal isn't that great where him opting-out is a given and there's too much time and too many factors between now & November to predict that stuff accurately now. But, yes, a player using that option as a way to spur a team into renegotiating an extended deal is one of the main benefits of the opt-out. Rod & CC did exactly that with the Yanx (to the team's eventual regret in both cases) and there will certainly be enough opt-outs coming up over the next few years where we'll get to see if that becomes the norm or whether some teams will dare their players to give up the remainder of the contract with the hope that there's a better one somewhere else.