Major League Ready

Vazquez does not count? His wRC+ is 129 Gallo does not count? His wRC+ is 195. They got Farmer and Solano to bolster offense against LHP. Larnach is back. Did you want them to keep him in AAA? His wRC+ is 209. They retooled Jeffers swing. His wRC+ is 286. The problem is the guys they (and we) relied on the most are not hitting with the exception of Buxton. Polanco is out. Correa, Gordon and Miranda have been very unproductive. Those four guys are not anyone we would want replaced so to say the problem is they “did nothing” ignores some very obvious facts.

They have given up 2 runs or less in 4 of 5 games and some people still want to complain how they did it! I love when one of our guy pitches 8 innings. However, we have all heard about the mountain of data that supports the FACT that most pitchers are far less effective the 3rd time through the order so why do so many people want to follow practices that are destined to fail?

15 minutes really? The average is under 2 minutes. You are welcome to your preference. I would much MUCH rather take two minutes and get it right. The players should decide the game not umpires.

Pitch clock, Larnach, and Alcala. I know Alcala has not had a big impact yet but that additional depth in the BP is a big deal. BTW .... Pitch clock is firmly in the #1 spot because this made an enormous positive impact that we will appreciate in every game for a very long-time.

It makes more sense to me to change the rules than to have umpires ignore them. The point was an electronic zone is not an impediment to the imperfections you described. It's just a tool/technology that can be programed to provide the ideal outcome 100% of the time. You are entitled to your opinion. If these to be really poor reasons to accept error in officiating that inevitably leads to an unfair advantage. BTW .... Those replays are going to run regardless of a challenge system. I think it would be fantastic if you could not tell the difference between a good umpire and a bad one. Also, I find the aesthetics of bad calls far more objectionable than taking a minute to get the call right. Plus, there really wouldn't be any aesthetics associated with an automated zone. It would just be correct. call 100% of the time. How is that bad aesthetics?

I would assume that the technology is sophisticated enough to program any unwanted implications out. The strike zone could be programed to interpret whatever ideal is wanted. If they wanted to "round the corners" I am sure the strike zone could be programmed accordingly. In other words, whatever we interpret to be the perfect strike zone for the good of the game could be called with near 100% accuracy. Bad calls can really change an AB and consequently the game. Why would we want to retain these errors. The automated strike zone can't get here quick enough for me.

Some of the question marks for this season are looking very good and that's a pretty big deal. Trevor Larnach and Jorge Alcala are looking like they will provide a significant boost this year. Larnach has recognized other teams are very reluctant to throw him fast balls and he is not swinging at breaking stuff off the plate. This looks sustainable. Alcala's raw stuff looks great. Also sustainable. Then, there is Gallo. I thought this was a decent move from the start. It's way too early to proclaim Gallo a success story but so far he looks a lot more like Gallo of 2021 than Gallo of 2022. This could be a big net positive. Now we need a healthy Polanco and Kirilloff. If those guys get going along with a resurgent Gallo and a break-out from Larnach we will all be in for a very fun season. BTW ... I am not a bit worried about Sands or Pagan dragging us down. They will not see any action with the game on the line and I suspect they are replaced in rather short order if they don't get it together.

In the order they are likely to be here at the end of the season. Pagan will get 12-15 appearances to look the part. Then, he will be replaced as soon as be replaced as soon as one of Henriquez, Winder or Megill pitch well enough to prompt ahis replacement. Taylor at first glance seems likely to stick around. However, the optimistic view or best case is Buxton is playing 4-5 days a week in CF by mid-May. Let’s hope Lewis and/or Martin replace Taylor by July 1. They are more complete players and more versatile defensively so we will get more out of the roster spot. Solano is a great bench player but the ideal scenario is a healthy Polanco and Julien playing so well they can’t keep in AAA and Solano is moved to make room. Maeda depends on how well he bounces back. The Twins have Ober/Varland, and SWR waiting for a spot. A good offer at the deadline might be more intriguing than putting Maeda in the pen especially if a couple of Alcala/Henriguez/Winder/Megill are looking good. Gallo: 2021 Gallo is not going anywhere unless they get an offer they can’t refuse at the deadline. If he looks like 2022 Galo he is traded or released by the deadline. If he is midway between those two years his fate will be a product of the health and performance of Kirilloff/Larnach/Gordon/Lewis/Julien. Mahle: Lots of variables with Mahle starting with health. A healthy Mahle is an extension candidate. An underperforming Mahle could be moved in favor of Varland or SWR if they are having a great year. The twins need to find 3 replacements in next year’s rotation. Gray is a very similar situation to Mahle.

It’s much easier against LHP to come up with a lead-off hitter. Correa, Farmer, Solano, and Garlick all hit LHP very well. A friend of mine saw Polanco on the back fields a couple days ago and said he was smashing the ball. He seems like the most likely solution short-term. Julien should be a good option but I don’t see them throwing him into that role until he proves he is ready for MLB. What about Larnach? He has looked like their best LH bat out of the gate. Not the guy I think of but he has looked very good.

Actually, I knew he had blown a lead but that does not change his raw stuff. This is why he is still in the minors and that's why he is a "dark horse". Can he harness his ability is the question. Perhaps more to the point, I just am not at all worried about the Pagan situation. A low leverage RP is just not consequential especially when you have guys like Winder, Megill and Henriquez that need to get a chance. Give Pagan a look in low leverage spots and move on if he does not get his act together.

Pretty easy to change that one and right now it has very little impact on our ability to win games. They use him in low leverage situation for a while. If they don't like the progression, move on to Winder / Megill or Henriquez. The dark horse could be Ortega. He looked pretty good this spring.

It’s an A- for me. I did not like Correa on a 10-12 year deal. Like him a lot on a 6 year deal. Farmer is a great fit. His OPS against LHP was almost identical to Correa last year (948 vs 945) What a weapon to bring off the bench especially when he can play so many positions. The Arraez trade made sense, especially long-term, because we have several guys that are better two way players at 2B and his lack of power does not profile well at 1B/DH. Replacing a #5 SP with someone like Lopez is going to make a team a better. Keeping Pagan and signing Solano is the most questionable move. I see the upside potential with Pagan but like most others have a hard time believing it comes to fruition. I also would not have added a free agent given the number of guys we have waiting for a shot like Henriquez, Winder, Megill, and Sands. I just don’t see blocking these guys given how unreliable RPs are in general. It's an A+ if one of Salas or Chourio turn out to be above average MLB players.

He is on the opening day roster because Henriguez and Winder are injured. That situation is likely to rectify itself relatively soon and Sands will be in AAA. I do think there is reasonable upside if he gains better command.

Time to renew my Milb streaming package. My top 10 things I will be watching / hoping to see at AAA this year. 1) Royce ready to join the big club. 2) How does Julien look at 2B and where else do they play him. 3) Louie Varland dominating. 4) Same as #3 with SWR. 5) A healthy Austin Martin picking up where he left off in the AFL 6) A rebound from Jordan Balazovic. 7) Better command from Trevor Megill. 8) An early return of a healthy Matt Canterino. 9) Do they try to develop Bechtold as a catcher. 10) A reduced K rate from Matt Wallner.

I like the idea of trading for a catcher but no way would I trade Ober when we are going to lose three SPs next year. I was an advocate of trading Maeda during the off-season if the opportunity was present. Ideally, they trade one of the short-term assets (Maeda/Mahle/Gray) to a likely contender willing to pay a premium because they have an immediate need. Mahle and Maeda are going to need to establish themselves as healthy before anyone is going to offer much for them. This could be interesting in 2-3 months, especially if Varland and SWR are killing it at AAA.

I see your point. There are many possible scenarios. It definitely opens up a lot of possibilities if Kirilloff fails for whatever reason. I think Julien at 1B in that scenario if his defense is not adequate at 2B is equally as likely as Miranda moving to 1B. That makes more sense at least for the next year or year and a half than making a whole at 3B by moving Miranda. Lee has a handful of Abs at AA so I just don't see them taking that kind of leap this year. I guess you could play Lewis at 3B but that seems like a waste of athleticism. 2B or OF seems like a better utilization of his ability to me. BTW ... I sure hope we don't have to explore any of the options made possible by Kirilloff failing.

You are really reaching. Edwin Diaz and a player that has literally never played an inning of professional baseball are two entirely different things. A player getting paid while they are injured is an entirely different thing. BTW .... I don't know if it's fair that Diaz gets paid when he is not paying but there is ABSOLUTELY no way the players would ever concede that benefit so there is no point in discussing it as a potential solution. I don't know that there is any real threat of players gambling their career on playing independent baseball. However, did you notice this model allows for an infinite degree of variation to account for such concerns. You could start the bonuses at $3M and you still have an $800K at the end of the 2nd round while paying every player after the 6th round $50K. This model still allows for a $30K increase to every full season Milb player. 1st and 2nd round draft picks are not giving up $1-3M to play independent ball.

How many are going to play another sport? This is a hyperbolic argument. We hear about every top prospect that could be drafted into another sport and they are a tiny percentage of the players that are actually top prospects in 2 sports. Name 5 from the last 10 years. Then, how many of those players with the potential to earn hundreds of millions will decide based on their draft bonus. If they are not in the top half of the first round, the money is not that consequential especially if there is any indication they are more likely to succeed in baseball. Their perceived relative ability to succeed in one sport over the other is more likely to influence their decision. What difference does it make if a player stays for another year of college or plays independent ball. How does that impact the product we pay to see? How does it change MLB at all? Why should players get paid on perceived value? They are going to make an insane amount of money if they actually live up to the perception so why should they be paid on perception. How is it fair that Mark Appel get's $6.35M to fail and many prospects get less than $100K to succeed? This union is totally focused on stars and the rest get the scraps. If the money paid to perceived stars that fail was allocated to all players, Milb players would be well compensated. It sure seems to pay the enormous money when players actually earn it while taking much better care of all the other players who make these league possible.

I would advocate that a larger piece of the pie goes to Milb players regardless of how they fund it but make no mistake where that money would come from. Like every other business, if the spend more in one area, they will spend less in another. The owners are not going change their total spending level. They would reallocate MLB salary expenditures. That's why the players association has not made higher Milb pay a priority.

I always assumed the players association promoted the current system because why would the owners care if the money was distributed more evenly? They also get rid of the PR problem associated with low Milb wages.

Really, how many top athletes can get drafted high enough in another professional sport that this would matter. We are talking about maybe one person a year and a signing bonus of $3-7M is not necessarily going to sway the few guys that get drafted that high because they have a good shot at making two or three hundred million. Most are still going to go wherever they think they have the best shot a enormous wealth. Beside that fact, this has absolutely nothing to do with what "the best players" make. We are talking about signing bonuses before a prospective player every plays one inning of Milb much less what they make as MLB player. This would not impact one iota the compensation for MLB players. Quit paying guys like Mark Appel $6M before they earn a thing and you could afford to play EVERY player a decent wage.

I thought about the guys with other options. Is the game really going to suffer in 1 guy every couple of years elects to go to the NFL? Consider the tradeoff. The reason I came up with this model is I was wondering how we could pay every single Milb player a good wage. The guys that earn the big bonuses are obviously the guys that become great players but those guys are going to make generational wealth and retire in their 30S. Why is the system all about them while ignoring the other 95% of players. The model I am talking about pays every player after round 6 a $50K signing bonus and more than double the current proposed system. Just to be clear, not the existing system but would double the proposed system. AAA players would make close to $100K. It would be very easy to take compensate every Milb player quite well. The players and owners have elected to pay a select few a lot and the rest very little. All they need to do is reallocate.

The problem is not how much teams spend on Milb players. The problem is that two-thirds of the money goes to 10% of the players. Last year MLB team paid out $291,408,490 in draft bonuses and as we all know most of those players fail. There is an alternative. If they made the max bonus $1M and dropped the bonus just 1 percent per draft slot, they could increase the average pay to Milb players by 48,706.53. If they made the max bonus $500K, the increase would be 69,228.29 on average. In other words, AAA players would get paid roughly $100K not the proposed $38,500 assuming AAA players would get paid a little more than A/A+ players. Obviously, this could be tweaked. If you prefer to have a 2M top bonus, the pay increase would be $36,594.33 at all levels. If you make the increase $50K at AAA and $22K at A ball you end up with roughly a $67K salary for AAA.

I am not sure what to make of Paddack either. My take is they have Lopez / Ryan / Ober next year and will need to fill two spots and come up with some depth. Paddack / Varland and SWR are the most likely candidates. One or two of Festa / Raya and Prielipp could be ready too. Perhaps not to start the season but by mid season. Dobnak and Balazovic are the long shots. Henriguez could end up being long-relief and a spot starter. Where I am going with this is that they don't need to sign a guy to fill the rotation. If they sign a free agent SP it should be a top of the rotation guy.

Where this gets trick is if the guy they really want to extend is Lopez, especially if Lopez is inclined to sign here. They still need to fill 3 spots. Of course, kind of have an extra (Ober) right now and Paddack will be back.