I never said tall guys didn't exist. Guys 6'1" or shorter and under 200lbs: Mays, Mantle, Aaron, Musial, Matthews, Hodges, Snider, Berra, Killebrew, Robinson, Banks... I stopped there. Guys are bigger now. I didn't realize this was news.
Yeah. Anderson is an intriguing player, for sure... But he's incredibly injury-prone and has been paid quite handsomely to not throw baseballs at opposing batters in anger. And that guy isn't worth a top 100 prospect. He's just isn't. Why give up, say, Eddie Rosario for Anderson when you can go get Johan Santana for a couple of million bucks? When you get right down to it, they're kinda the same guy (though Anderson has a better chance of rebounding... though I wouldn't put it much higher, honestly).
Fair enough. I guess it all depends on where you draw the line for "ace". Personally, I tend to believe that not every team has an ace and if a guy is outside the top 20 in MLB starters, he cannot be called an ace.
If Matt Garza is a borderline ace, then Brad Radke was a legit ace pitcher. And I don't think many people will make that argument about Radke. Garza is absolutely a #2, though... Maybe a borderline #3 a couple of seasons.
Eh, not so much. 60 years ago, a guy nicknamed "The Beast" was closing out his career... At a mighty size and weight of 5'11", 195 lbs. Mantle was roughly the same size, as was Harmon Killebrew. Most of the "big" guys of that era were around six feet tall, barring a few guys like DiMaggio and Williams. It was a different game. Pretty much every slugger today is 6'3" and 230 lbs.
I actually applaud this move. Spending $50m+ just to negotiate with a guy is absurd. Treat these players more like free agents... Or better yet, figure out a way to incorporate them into the draft or include them as international signing money.
Yep. People are way too bullish on Buxton being in the Majors in 2014 but I think early 2015 is a pretty reasonable timeframe. Of course, Byron could stumble a bit and Thrylos could be right as well. But counting on him to be a significant contributor in 2014 is overly optimistic.
Well stated. I wish people would understand that outliers are just that... OUTLIERS. Using Pedro Martinez to "prove" a point isn't going to convince anyone who is looking at the situation objectively because we all understand that Pedro Martinez was a freak of nature. No one here wants to see Berrios fail. Every report writes up the kid as being an incredible personality. A few of us are merely tempering our optimism based on historical evidence, nothing more.
No one is saying that Berrios cannot be a starter just because of his height and build, they're saying that smaller guys have a harder time holding up over the course of a career. Tim Lincecum is an example that favors Law's point, not yours. He was a dominant pitcher for the first three years of his career. Since 2008, his average fastball has dropped from 94.0 to 90.2. Unsurprisingly, his performance during that time has gone from "best in league dominant" to "really bad". Sure, small guys can have success in the league. Pedro was a classic example of that happening. Johan held up... for awhile. But the odds are stacked against a small guy holding up compared to a guy who is 230 lbs and 6'4". People shouldn't take this as some kind of affront to Berrios. We all hope he succeeds... But there's a chance his smallish frame holds him back somewhat or forces a move to the bullpen.
I've only heard it mentioned in regards to his size. Understandably, it has been questioned whether his frame can hold up to multiple 200+ inning seasons as a starter.
Yep. Right around the time the Twins are waving Samardzija good-bye in free agency, Buxton and Sano are (hopefully) coming into their own. And for the privilege of picking up Samardzija, the franchise is now short at least two minor league arms who could complement Sano and Buxton. Best case scenario is that the team gets to pay Samardzija $80-100m to stick around through his declining years. Yay all around. If the Twins absolutely must pick up a pitcher, throw money at Matt Garza. At least that way you don't lose prospects for the honor of overpaying a pitcher. The Twins have money and no team has ever complained about having too many prospects.
Given the amount of championships they've won in the past decade compared to the money they've spent, a lot of people should be walking out the door with their stuff in cardboard boxes. This signing only reinforces that.
Nah, the Kemp contract isn't this bad if only because the Dodgers signed him through his age 27-34 seasons. A pretty dumb contract but not historically so.
I want to see the rest of the market shake out. Maybe trade a reliever or two, pick up some third base help and a vet catcher on a 1-2 year deal. Maybe an outfielder if one presents himself (I haven't looked through who is left). If a really nice player is left in January, absolutely snatch him up but I wouldn't be playing in Tanaka/Garza waters right now. Start rounding out the roster with cheaper guys on short-term deals.
You're not factoring in that some of those guys might be traded if a team falls out of contention (Masterson or Bailey would be my bets), eliminating the possibility of a comp pick. If Garza can be had for anything close to Nolasco money, you have to make that deal... But I don't think it will happen. Too many teams want pitching.
I wouldn't give that up for one year of Brett Anderson. I wouldn't even give up Perkins. The guy has pitched 165 innings in the past three seasons combined.
Heh, yep. Lofton posted a WAR over 4.0 in every one of his first eight seasons. He posted a WAR of 4.9 or higher in seven of those seasons. Ellsbury has two seasons with a WAR above 5.0.
Doug Fister was not a salary dump. He's a guy who has posted an ERA+ over 110 in each of the past two seasons and is 29 years old. Detroit needed salary relief and that played into why they traded him, sure... But it was not a dump.
There is absolutely nothing stopping the Twins from picking up a superstar midseason if they're surprised by a playoff run and need a piece for a push toward the playoffs. On the other hand, you can pretty much be sure that if they sign someone to a 5+ year deal right now, that player is going to be some degree of mediocre or bad by the time the farm is peaking. And you just illustrated why I think incremental FA signings are the right course of action. What happens if Buxton gets injured or falls on his face but Sano is good? Wouldn't it be nice to have $10m a year to sign the next Michael Bourn and give Sano/Mauer a complementary player in the lineup? Sure, he won't be Byron Buxton but he won't be Darin Mastroianni, either. Given your strategy, that's not possible. Any failure on the farm cannot be fixed through any measure other than trade because there is no payroll flexibility to shift assets on the fly.
That is an unrealistic expectation. Today's MLB players strike out more. It's intentional, not accidental. Guys don't choke up and go for the opposite field single like they did in the 70s... And that's okay. Statistical analysis seems to back up that thinking. Joe Mauer struck out 88 and 89 times in 2012 and 2013. Setting the bar at 100 K's is way too high (or low, depending on how you look at the phrase).