The Swamp

Posted: **Thu Nov 29, 2018 2:10 pm**

I think we can all agree that there's no scenario under which it makes sense though. (Unless Seattle ends up eating a ridiculously huge chunk of Cano's contract I guess).

Posted: **Thu Nov 29, 2018 2:14 pm**

Even then, I don't see why the Mets would be giving up prospects for relief help.

Posted: **Thu Nov 29, 2018 2:17 pm**

mister d wrote: ↑Thu Nov 29, 2018 2:14 pm Even then, I don't see why the Mets would be giving up prospects for relief help.

True. Yeah, it just doesn't make any sense.

Posted: **Thu Nov 29, 2018 2:22 pm**

My earlier point about teams jumping in to be his first trade stands. (1) He's never done anything like this before and (2) you never know which of his own prospects he's not going to value quite right.

Posted: **Thu Nov 29, 2018 10:18 pm**

This trade is amazing if it’s as reported; Kelenic was 6th overall in the draft at already inside Klaw’s midseason top 50 and Dunn was honorable mention.

Posted: **Mon Dec 03, 2018 9:31 am**

As it stands right now, the Tigers fourth-highest paid player is Justin Verlander ($8M). Prince Fielder is fifth-highest ($6M).

Posted: **Tue Dec 04, 2018 4:22 pm**

Corbin is a kinda painful miss. I was certain he was coming.

Posted: **Tue Dec 04, 2018 5:40 pm**

mister d wrote: ↑Tue Dec 04, 2018 4:22 pm Corbin is a kinda painful miss. I was certain he was coming.

Reports are that Cashman's offer was 5/$100m. That's probably sorta true. He got that offer with a nod to check back if/when he receives a stronger one..But the fact of the matter is, Ted Lerner is a lot richer than the Steinbrenner family. 6/140 is bold, but I don't doubt for a second that Cashman would've gone beyond $110 in that 5 year deal. He just wasn't going 6 years.

Which tells us one of two things:

1) Cashman didn't view Corbin as highly as others do and/or, 2) there's a recession looming over Bronx, New York.

Posted: **Tue Dec 04, 2018 6:42 pm**

mister d wrote: ↑Thu Nov 29, 2018 2:14 pm Even then, I don't see why the Mets would be giving up prospects for relief help.

With Diaz's favorable contract, couldn't they get a lot for him in a midseason trade?

And it sounds like the money saving is significant too.

Posted: **Tue Dec 04, 2018 6:53 pm**

There's no money saved; Cano is owed $120MM, the Mariners kicked in $20MM and the offsets back were like $40MM, so they're still taking on $60mm or something in Cano's salary, plus giving up their top 2 prospects for a reliever. I just don't get the overall logic for a team not right there.

Posted: **Tue Dec 04, 2018 6:56 pm**

EnochRoot wrote: ↑Tue Dec 04, 2018 5:40 pm1) Cashman didn't view Corbin as highly as others do and/or, 2) there's a recession looming over Bronx, New York.

3) He really thought Corbin wouldn't go somewhere that wasn't the team he's always wanted to play for. And if that's the case, it sucks they couldn't meet in the middle. If you figure Corbin has four scenarios, where he's as good as last year, as good as priors, outright bad and hurt, the first two you can live with, the third you put him in the pen as a lefty and the fourth you get insurance. Just didn't seem like crazy risk given how top heavy it would have made this rotation.

(But I do think 2) is possible as well, either because they don't equate spending with winning or because maybe there's an attempt to be liquid for a future sale.)

Posted: **Tue Dec 04, 2018 7:23 pm**

mister d wrote: ↑Tue Dec 04, 2018 6:56 pm
EnochRoot wrote: ↑Tue Dec 04, 2018 5:40 pm1) Cashman didn't view Corbin as highly as others do and/or, 2) there's a recession looming over Bronx, New York.
3) He really thought Corbin wouldn't go somewhere that wasn't the team he's always wanted to play for. And if that's the case, it sucks they couldn't meet in the middle. If you figure Corbin has four scenarios, where he's as good as last year, as good as priors, outright bad and hurt, the first two you can live with, the third you put him in the pen as a lefty and the fourth you get insurance. Just didn't seem like crazy risk given how top heavy it would have made this rotation.

(But I do think 2) is possible as well, either because they don't equate spending with winning or because maybe there's an attempt to be liquid for a future sale.)

Well, if all the young guys turn out to be great, then that would cause a massive swelling of the payroll, too.

Posted: **Tue Dec 04, 2018 7:29 pm**

But seriously though: owning the Yankees is about as sure of a thing as it gets in sports, right?

Posted: **Wed Dec 05, 2018 8:14 am**

mister d wrote: ↑Tue Dec 04, 2018 6:56 pm
EnochRoot wrote: ↑Tue Dec 04, 2018 5:40 pm1) Cashman didn't view Corbin as highly as others do and/or, 2) there's a recession looming over Bronx, New York.
3) He really thought Corbin wouldn't go somewhere that wasn't the team he's always wanted to play for. And if that's the case, it sucks they couldn't meet in the middle. If you figure Corbin has four scenarios, where he's as good as last year, as good as priors, outright bad and hurt, the first two you can live with, the third you put him in the pen as a lefty and the fourth you get insurance. Just didn't seem like crazy risk given how top heavy it would have made this rotation.

(But I do think 2) is possible as well, either because they don't equate spending with winning or because maybe there's an attempt to be liquid for a future sale.)

Is someone who grew up wanting to play for the Yankees really someone you want on your team?

Posted: **Wed Dec 05, 2018 9:46 am**

Really good stuff from Jayson Stark on The Shift. I'll send it to anyone who's interested

Posted: **Wed Dec 05, 2018 10:26 am**

The Jayson Stark Athletic article on the shift really is interesting as hell, per TF's post:

A piece of it:

Why is this a topic?

First, a quick look at how we got here. Some key factoids and figures:

Did you know there were nearly 8,000 more shifts on balls in play in 2018 than in 2017, according to Sports Info Solutions. Yessir, we said 8,000!

Did you know there were nearly 28,000 more shifts this year than there were just five years ago? Yep, we said 28,000!

Did you know that there were fewer ground-ball hits in 2018 (13,213) than there have been in any season since baseball expanded to 30 teams in

1998 – and over 1,200 fewer than we saw as recently as 2015? Uh-huh, we said 1,200!

Did you know the chances of a left-handed hitter reaching base on a pulled ground ball to the right side have dropped to their lowest rate since Sports Info Solutions began keeping track a decade and a half ago? That Reached Base Rate (which is basically OBP, but includes errors) was a measly .192 this year. That’s a drop of 43 points just since 2011!

And did you know there were fewer singles this year (26,322) than in any season in this millennium – and nearly 3,000 fewer than just a decade ago? Yeah, we said 3,000!

That isn’t all The Shift’s doing, obviously. It’s a product, largely, of The Shift Epidemic plus The Launch Angle Epidemic plus The Strikeout Epidemic.

But you can make a case that those are all related developments. And there are people in the game who are emphatically making that case – though not everyone agrees with them.

“Why would they want to change rules that have been in place for a long time, to tell people where to stand?” Braves hitting coach Kevin Seitzer wondered. “I don’t understand why we need to change the rules just because [hitters] won’t make an adjustment.”

OK, here’s why: A number of people inside the game, including some members of the competition committee, have concluded that teams and hitters have reacted to The Shift by saying, “Let’s hit the ball over those shifts.” (See: “launch angle.”) They’ve also concluded that those uppercut swings are fueling the tsunami of strikeouts.

And, finally, they’ve concluded that teams are never going to react to The Shift by saying, “See where nobody’s standing on the other side of the infield? Let’s hit it there.” The Shift has been A Thing for about a decade now. Yet the cool factor of the opposite-field single hasn’t spread across the land – and shows no signs of doing so.

So why are they talking about limiting or banning shifts? That about covers it!

Posted: **Wed Dec 05, 2018 10:30 am**

I am going to speculate so buckle up ... (long winded explanation about the Yankees having Severino approaching his arb years, Tanaka on the books, Paxton on the roster now) ... I wonder if they Yankees are on a longer term plan and would have taken Corbin at a relative bargain but are fine keeping that $20MM SP slot open for next year when Gerrit Cole is a UFA. We know they loved him in the draft and tried again to get him from Pittsburgh, so its possible they strongly prefer him to Corbin and would rather wait a season. Side benefit that they were only competing with NL teams for Corbin where this would directly hurt an AL competitor.

(In this scenario, they either bridge the year with a guy like Happ or swing another prospect for lower cost, younger SP.)

((I don't, at all, want fucking Bumgarner.))

Posted: **Wed Dec 05, 2018 10:31 am**

I swear I've posted in here before about how "just hit it the other way" both isn't nearly as simple as people make it sound and not nearly as fun to watch.

Posted: **Wed Dec 05, 2018 10:40 am**

Why can't we let the smart/innovative managers figure out how to beat it instead of banning it?

Posted: **Wed Dec 05, 2018 10:46 am**

Because the list of hitters who consistently successfully go the other way and hitters who are in the Hall of Fame is pretty much the same. Its an extremely rare and difficult skill.

Posted: **Wed Dec 05, 2018 10:49 am**

brian wrote: ↑Wed Dec 05, 2018 10:40 am Why can't we let the smart/innovative managers figure out how to beat it instead of banning it?

Cuz the externalities of the shift make for a nearly unwatchable product.

I mean, fans are gonna be fans no matter what, but my guess is ultimately the shift drives additional people from watching the sport.

Posted: **Wed Dec 05, 2018 10:55 am**

mister d wrote: ↑Wed Dec 05, 2018 10:46 am Because the list of hitters who consistently successfully go the other way and hitters who are in the Hall of Fame is pretty much the same. Its an extremely rare and difficult skill.

ESPN had a good article last year where they interviewed hitters like Matt Carpenter and Kyle Seager who get shifted against all the time. They all echoed this point that it’s much easier said than done to “just hit the ball the other way.” They also pointed out that if they try that, the odds of an extra-base hit are minimal. Whereas if they try to hit over the shift and make good contact, it’s much more likely that they can get a double or HR. These guys had clearly thought about it in depth too, as some of them were citing probabilities of a run-scoring inning if they hit a single as opposed to a double.

Posted: **Wed Dec 05, 2018 10:59 am**

Arbitrary numbers ...

Last 15 years, there are 776 hitters w/ 1,000+ PA and only 5 rank in the top 100 in both oppo% and wOBA: Votto, Holliday, Helton, Magglio, Mauer

Same sample of players, the correlation between wOBA and pull% is +0.19, wOBA and oppo% is -0.16 (and wOBA and middle% is -0.15). The correlation between hard hit % and pull is +0.33, hard hit % and oppo is -0.37.

Posted: **Wed Dec 05, 2018 11:06 am**

mister d wrote: ↑Wed Dec 05, 2018 10:59 am Arbitrary numbers ...

Last 15 years, there are 776 hitters w/ 1,000+ PA and only 5 rank in the top 100 in both oppo% and wOBA: Votto, Holliday, Helton, Magglio, Mauer

Same sample of players, the correlation between wOBA and pull% is +0.19, wOBA and oppo% is -0.16 (and wOBA and middle% is -0.15). The correlation between hard hit % and pull is +0.33, hard hit % and oppo is -0.37.

Hmmm. All the guys still with a chance (Ordonez off ballot already) are not going to have slam dunk HOF cases, no? I mean, I think Mauer, Helton and Votto should be in. Holliday has been really good for a while.

Posted: **Wed Dec 05, 2018 11:08 am**

Yeah, my comment higher up was referring to Gwynn/Boggs/Jeter (or Williams for the olds) who are always held up as "well he did it". But I think that list does indicate that to both hit opposite field and be great is a rare trait given all five of those guys were really, really great hitters.

Posted: **Wed Dec 05, 2018 11:14 am**

I can’t imagine a universe where Joey Votto isn’t a first ballot hall of famer. I just checked bb-ref, and while it looks like he’ll get in, the metrics they use suggest it will not be on his first ballot.

Sounds like the metrics they’re using need further tweaking.

Posted: **Wed Dec 05, 2018 11:16 am**

Flipside, 7 hitters are in the bottom 100 of wOBA and pull% and 23 are bottom 100 wOBA and oppo%.

Very bad and very pull: Andy LaRoche, Byron Buxton, Geoff Blum, Jayson Nix, Jesus Flores, Koyie Hill, Sam Fuld

Very bad and very oppo: Adeiny Hechavarria, Alexi Amarista, Andrew Romine, Billy Hamilton, Brad Ausmus, Brandon Barnes, Cesar Izturis, Donovan Solano, Emilio Bonifacio, Everth Cabrera, Humberto Quintero, Joey Gathright, Jonathan Herrera, Josh Thole, Juan Castro, Juan Lagares, Miguel Rojas, Orlando Arcia, Ronny Cedeno, Ryan Goins, Willie Bloomquist, Wilson Valdez, Yolmer Sanchez

Posted: **Wed Dec 05, 2018 11:18 am**

EnochRoot wrote: ↑Wed Dec 05, 2018 11:14 am I can’t imagine a universe where Joey Votto isn’t a first ballot hall of famer. I just checked bb-ref, and while it looks like he’ll get in, the metrics they use suggest it will not be on his first ballot.

Sounds like the metrics they’re using need further tweaking.

I am totally biased but agree. Give him 5-7 more homers a year and he's probably a slam dunk.

ANd he's a career .311 hitter who has never led league in batting!

Posted: **Wed Dec 05, 2018 11:22 am**

EnochRoot wrote: ↑Wed Dec 05, 2018 11:14 am I can’t imagine a universe where Joey Votto isn’t a first ballot hall of famer. I just checked bb-ref, and while it looks like he’ll get in, the metrics they use suggest it will not be on his first ballot.

Votto is really close to "what if Edgar could play the field and was a plus defender".

Posted: **Wed Dec 05, 2018 11:27 am**

Although if you look at it this way, maybe there's more nuance than I'm thinking?

https://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx? ... &sort=16,d

Posted: **Wed Dec 05, 2018 11:41 am**

EnochRoot wrote: ↑Wed Dec 05, 2018 11:14 am I can’t imagine a universe where Joey Votto isn’t a first ballot hall of famer. I just checked bb-ref, and while it looks like he’ll get in, the metrics they use suggest it will not be on his first ballot.

Sounds like the metrics they’re using need further tweaking.

How about the universe where Jeff Bagwell wasn't a first ballot hall of famer?

Posted: **Wed Dec 05, 2018 11:47 am**

Giff wrote: ↑Wed Dec 05, 2018 11:41 am
EnochRoot wrote: ↑Wed Dec 05, 2018 11:14 am I can’t imagine a universe where Joey Votto isn’t a first ballot hall of famer. I just checked bb-ref, and while it looks like he’ll get in, the metrics they use suggest it will not be on his first ballot.

Sounds like the metrics they’re using need further tweaking.
How about the universe where Jeff Bagwell wasn't a first ballot hall of famer?

Bagwell could’ve hit 800 homeruns and still not have been a first ballot hall of famer. Steroid suspicion is a bitch.

Posted: **Wed Dec 05, 2018 11:49 am**

My point remains though. Once you start having circles and half circles and trapezoids all over the field indicating who can stand where then baseball is officially bullshit in my opinion.

Posted: **Wed Dec 05, 2018 11:51 am**

Has there ever been any credible evidence Bagwell used PEDs, other than "he had big muscles and played in an era when a lot of other guys used PEDs?"

Posted: **Wed Dec 05, 2018 11:53 am**

Johnny Carwash wrote: ↑Wed Dec 05, 2018 11:51 am Has there ever been any credible evidence Bagwell used PEDs, other than "he had big muscles and played in an era when a lot of other guys used PEDs?"

Such a bullshit excuse.

Posted: **Wed Dec 05, 2018 12:16 pm**

I mean, yes but ... we all think he did PEDs, right? Its bullshit certain guys are targeted and others aren't and the reasons are often bullshit, but we also agree the targets are almost universally "guilty"?

Posted: **Wed Dec 05, 2018 12:20 pm**

It feels like almost every other guy who got dinged for presumed PED was either caught outright or at least appeared in a reliably sourced report. With Bagwell, maybe I missed something, but I can't remember anything of substance (no pun intended).

Posted: **Wed Dec 05, 2018 12:29 pm**

I remember bagwell with the sox. Maybe we should do a before and after pic analysis.

Posted: **Wed Dec 05, 2018 12:33 pm**

I remember me at Keene High School

Posted: **Wed Dec 05, 2018 12:33 pm**

HaulCitgo wrote: ↑Wed Dec 05, 2018 12:29 pm I remember bagwell with the sox. Maybe we should do a before and after pic analysis.

I’m calling bullshit on this. Bagwell didn’t play above AA in the Red Sox organization and I doubt you remember the physical appearance of guys on the 1990 New Britain Red Sox.

The Swamp

2018-19 MLB Offseason Thread

Re: 2018-19 MLB Offseason Thread

Re: 2018-19 MLB Offseason Thread

Re: 2018-19 MLB Offseason Thread

Re: 2018-19 MLB Offseason Thread

Re: 2018-19 MLB Offseason Thread

Re: 2018-19 MLB Offseason Thread

Re: 2018-19 MLB Offseason Thread

Re: 2018-19 MLB Offseason Thread

Re: 2018-19 MLB Offseason Thread

Re: 2018-19 MLB Offseason Thread

Re: 2018-19 MLB Offseason Thread

Re: 2018-19 MLB Offseason Thread

Re: 2018-19 MLB Offseason Thread

Re: 2018-19 MLB Offseason Thread

Re: 2018-19 MLB Offseason Thread

Re: 2018-19 MLB Offseason Thread

Re: 2018-19 MLB Offseason Thread

Re: 2018-19 MLB Offseason Thread

Re: 2018-19 MLB Offseason Thread

Re: 2018-19 MLB Offseason Thread

Re: 2018-19 MLB Offseason Thread

Re: 2018-19 MLB Offseason Thread

Re: 2018-19 MLB Offseason Thread

Re: 2018-19 MLB Offseason Thread

Re: 2018-19 MLB Offseason Thread

Re: 2018-19 MLB Offseason Thread

Re: 2018-19 MLB Offseason Thread

Re: 2018-19 MLB Offseason Thread

Re: 2018-19 MLB Offseason Thread

Re: 2018-19 MLB Offseason Thread

Re: 2018-19 MLB Offseason Thread

Re: 2018-19 MLB Offseason Thread

Re: 2018-19 MLB Offseason Thread

Re: 2018-19 MLB Offseason Thread

Re: 2018-19 MLB Offseason Thread

Re: 2018-19 MLB Offseason Thread

Re: 2018-19 MLB Offseason Thread

Re: 2018-19 MLB Offseason Thread

Re: 2018-19 MLB Offseason Thread

Re: 2018-19 MLB Offseason Thread