I'm assuming you'd want Nick at 3B and Miggy to DH. What would you do with Devers? I have to assume you're thinking along the lines of Hanley covering the 1st year or two but what would you expect for the remainder of the contract ($5 million/year)? Nick can play some OF so he could be a 4th OF. Are you think Bradley in the trade? If so are you thinking Nick in LF?
The offseason heading into 2018
- Thread starter Devizier
- Start date
Not third, no. Castellanos moved to RF when Candelario came up. He was fine — and incidentally went on a tear at the plate too. Imagine he’d be fine in either corner.
Fangraphs has Castellanos (SSS, yes) at -80.5 UZR/150 in RF over 173 innings with a bad arm and bad range and not a single play made above "routine" difficulty. I'm not ready to say that's "fine," nor am I ready to bump any of the current outfield for him.
Fair point. SSS but that’s well worse than I remember checking.
I wasn’t suggesting he supplant Mookie in right. I can’t imagine he’d be worse in left than JDM, but I haven’t seen him play out there. The Tigers have apparently been talking about moving him to the outfield since 2013.
In any case, Jeimer Candelario is the Tigers’ third baseman, and they have two DHs.
I'm pretty sure Adam Smith had the reserve clause in mind when he wrote:
"People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public."
Last edited:
Miggy is interesting. I dont think (from appearances) he is taking care of his body as well as he should which may be contributing to injuries and accelerated decline . It depends on how much he costs and the medical review of course. He probably hates the Yankees after last years brawl and all the sucker punches so thats a plus as well.
As for minor league pay they did quite well into the 70's. After free agency their pay did not keep up with inflation. I recall some figure that inflation had increased 3-4 times faster than minor league pay since 1976. This could be why college athletes choose football and basketball over baseball if they have a choice
As for minor league pay they did quite well into the 70's. After free agency their pay did not keep up with inflation. I recall some figure that inflation had increased 3-4 times faster than minor league pay since 1976. This could be why college athletes choose football and basketball over baseball if they have a choice
I'm sorry. I don't recall saying anything about the minor league players' situation being acceptable. I simply noted a way that they could put their limited meal money to good use rather than subsisting solely on fast food restaurants.
There have been attempts by minor league players to unionize. Some recent headlines:
Minor League Baseball Players Make Poverty-Level Wages
And this ex-pitcher is suing Major League Baseball to get them their fair share.
Ian GordonJuly/August 2014 Issue of Mother Jones
In suing MLB, minor leaguers want minimum wage for maximum effort
Jorge L. Ortiz, USA TODAY, April 22, 2015
The "Save America's Pastime Act" was introduced in the House on June 24 and it would amend existing labor law to explicitly say 7,500 minor league players are not entitled to either minimum wage guarantees or overtime pay, even though most are working 60 to 70 hours a week.
Chris Isidore for CNN Money, July 1, 2016
Baseball and the pay rates of minor leaguers is a fascinating topic; it would be worth collecting these posts into a dedicated thread that’s easier to find.
An acquaintance of mine has a son in MLB, and we’ve discussed a number of CBA issues. Among the things he’s mentioned is that the Players Union is concerned with the cost of getting into baseball, with the need to be on the showcase circuit and travel to get noticed. The PU is apparently already using some of their charitable money to help defray these costs. This is pursuant to MLB eyeing the amateur baseball market (whose total revenue seems on par with MLB’s) and thinking about how to get a piece of that pie...
From the standpoint of the CBT, my friend said repeatedly that really the only thing stopping ownership from spending more to win is the owners’ attention to their own bottom line. I wouldn’t be surprised if Clark & the Union wasn’t surprized that the new limits would be as a hard cap by teams; plenty of teams have blown through the limits in the past but this seems like a blind spot for the Union where they don’t really acknowledge how teams value talent acquisition, especially for young players not making a lot of money.
I think we also have to look at Ownership has 2 factions, the majority who want to keep labor costs down to preserve their profits (represented by Manfred), and other teams willing to spend to win (evidenced by L.L.’s run for commissioner) - the latter clearly isn’t represented at the table, but the union would be served to touch base with them or target demands towards them. It’s only a question of whether anyone is really looking out for minor leaguers, the Union doesn’t have an interest and appears happy to bargain away their rights, and either ownership faction has a minimal interest in paying them more. The second faction would only be interested if it presented a competitive advantage for signing talent, and there doesn’t look like there’s much wiggle there.
An acquaintance of mine has a son in MLB, and we’ve discussed a number of CBA issues. Among the things he’s mentioned is that the Players Union is concerned with the cost of getting into baseball, with the need to be on the showcase circuit and travel to get noticed. The PU is apparently already using some of their charitable money to help defray these costs. This is pursuant to MLB eyeing the amateur baseball market (whose total revenue seems on par with MLB’s) and thinking about how to get a piece of that pie...
From the standpoint of the CBT, my friend said repeatedly that really the only thing stopping ownership from spending more to win is the owners’ attention to their own bottom line. I wouldn’t be surprised if Clark & the Union wasn’t surprized that the new limits would be as a hard cap by teams; plenty of teams have blown through the limits in the past but this seems like a blind spot for the Union where they don’t really acknowledge how teams value talent acquisition, especially for young players not making a lot of money.
I think we also have to look at Ownership has 2 factions, the majority who want to keep labor costs down to preserve their profits (represented by Manfred), and other teams willing to spend to win (evidenced by L.L.’s run for commissioner) - the latter clearly isn’t represented at the table, but the union would be served to touch base with them or target demands towards them. It’s only a question of whether anyone is really looking out for minor leaguers, the Union doesn’t have an interest and appears happy to bargain away their rights, and either ownership faction has a minimal interest in paying them more. The second faction would only be interested if it presented a competitive advantage for signing talent, and there doesn’t look like there’s much wiggle there.
Why would the PU be concerned with the cost of getting into baseball when they could care less about minor league pay and support MLB initiatives to curtail amateur bonuses?
As for the 2 factions. Quite simply any business owner wants to keep costs down, which isn't the same as saying they don't want to spend. They just dont want to spend more than needed to meet their objectives.
The 2 factions are those who want to win and those who dont see it as necessary to their bottom line. The former seems to be a decided minority. With shared revenues and long term RSN deals , rising franchise valuations, etc; attendance revenue is not as important as it once was, and so winning is not as important.
If MLBPA is truly as ignorant or unaware as you suggest (assuming I understood correctly) then perhaps Tony Clark is not up to the job
Marlins reportedly in talks on Realmuto and Yelich......I think Realmuto would be a nice upgrade......Hopefully, DD is involved
http://www.miamiherald.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/barry-jackson/article192043574.html
http://www.miamiherald.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/barry-jackson/article192043574.html
As mentioned elsewhere, maybe not so crazy for Benintendi to be in play for Yelich, as Yelich while being a similar player has a much better Fenway profile. Could Benintendi, Vasquez, Chavis and taking Prado back get us Yelich and Realmuto?
I would hope so. Prado isn't good anymore and he's not cheap. But I think that offer is somewhere in the neighborhood of fair for Yelich and Realmuto. IMO, Yelich is an upgrade over Benintendi and Realmuto is an upgrade over Vazquez, so you need to offer something to make up the difference. Maybe Chavis is too much, but they could do two lesser prospects like Mata and Ockimey or something.
I think the cost savings between Yellich & Benintendi would go along way towards making up that difference, especially to the Marlins. The Sox are tight enough against the CBT that they shouldn’t just swallow bad deals and then add talent (from a depleted farm) for a marginal upgrade.
If you mean Prado, yeah, I agree. I wouldn't want him back at all. If you mean Yelich or Realmuto, neither is on a bad contract. In fact, both are going to produce significantly more value than they will be paid.
Yelich is owed a little more than 28 million over the next four years (total, not AAV). He's been a 4+ win player in each of the last two seasons. He'll earn his remaining contract next year alone, and probably then some.
Realmuto is in his arbitration years, so his earning potential will be suppressed by that system.
Is it worth taking a short term flier on Jose Bautista? He is coming off one of his worst seasons. He can play a couple positions. Being age 36 and coming off a terrible season, would he be worth it on a short term 2 year deal as opposed to a huge JDM contract?
No. He's cooked.
- He traded 4.4% of walk rate for 4.9% of strikeout rate.
- His ISO dropped from .217 to .164.
- His O-Contact% dropped off in 2016 and ticked further down in 2017.
- His Z-Contact% dropped 8%.
- His hard contact rate dropped 9.6% (though it spiked in 2016, it's still down 3.9% from 2015)
Why not Bradley instead of Benintendi for Yelich? I understand Beni would have greater appeal (money and talent wise) to the Marlins, but that can also be offset by taking back someone like Tazawa and/or Ziegler.
JBJ will likely cost as much as Yelich this year, and will be more expensive in the next two years. He's a step back for them financially.
Agree about Prado, I just think taking his contract separates the Sox from other offers. Realmuto is a massive young piece to add, to get him and Yelich in one deal would likely require something like that.
While I see Realmuto as an upgrade over Vazquez, the difference in their receiving skill closes the gap a bit. Framing can be taught, and the existence of another great framer on the roster (like Leon) mitigates the difference a bit, but I think Benintendi, Vazquez and a couple of prospects not named Groome or Chavis should be enough. If it's not, walk away.
Yeah, I meant Prado. I like Yelich and Realmuto, and their surplus value won't mean much to the Marlins, who won't be competing for awhile. I can see them liking Benny, but I don't think the upgrade in LF is as important, especially if Yelich isn't able to cover CF as well (which makes the idea of moving JBJ for him make less sense). if Benny & Vaz for Yellich & Realmuto is enough to entice the Marlins, then I can see it, but not throwing in Chavis or taking back Prado.
Why is Yelich>Benintendi seemingly so clearcut? They are projected to have incredibly similar years next year and Benny is 2.5 years younger. What am I missing about Yelich that makes him the clear cut choice over Benintendi going forward?
There's a recency bias that makes people think Miguel Cabrera's poor 2017 heralds a collapse similar to what we've seen with Pujols. But there's a major difference. The shift has killed Pujols. Cabrera is shift-proof.
Teams began deploying the shift against Pujols in 2012, and then ramped it up in 2014. In his career, he's been shifted on in 1174 PAs (that did not result in a home run, walk, or strikeout), and 99 percent of those came since 2012. He's pulled more groundballs than anyone in baseball the last two years (302).
Of course, most teams shift against LHH hitters. Pujols is a comical exception. He's is the most shifted-on right-handed hitter this century. Pujols pulls the ball roughly 50 percent of at-bats, and he's the slowest runner in baseball. Thus, he's very bad against the shift, hitting .256/.253/.305 on balls in play, a 51 wRC+. (Pujols ran 23.0 seconds to first base in 2017. Cabrera's at a playable 25.5 — the average is 27.0 seconds).
Nobody shifts against Cabrera because his spray charts are much more diffuse. He hits the ball anywhere and still hits it hard (more in his bad 2017 season than any Pujols year since 2010). In his career, teams have only shifted against Miggy in 194 at-bats with balls in play. He's very good in those PAs, hitting .354/.351/.438 for a 114 wRC+ (again, this is balls in play minus home runs). The last time anyone bothered to shift against Miggy was 2015, and he hit .525/.512/.625 in 41 PAs.
His back issues are concerning, but whatever decline he may be facing isn't accurately compared to Pujols. JDM is obviously preferred, but there's too much linking us to the Tigers to think DD hasn't considered using his only asset—money—to acquire Miggy and a good young player rather than spend it in free agency.
This approach also applies to taking on an obvious fit in Prado (basically Nunez who can actually play third) to swap Beni and Vazquez for Yelich and Realmuto.
Teams began deploying the shift against Pujols in 2012, and then ramped it up in 2014. In his career, he's been shifted on in 1174 PAs (that did not result in a home run, walk, or strikeout), and 99 percent of those came since 2012. He's pulled more groundballs than anyone in baseball the last two years (302).
Of course, most teams shift against LHH hitters. Pujols is a comical exception. He's is the most shifted-on right-handed hitter this century. Pujols pulls the ball roughly 50 percent of at-bats, and he's the slowest runner in baseball. Thus, he's very bad against the shift, hitting .256/.253/.305 on balls in play, a 51 wRC+. (Pujols ran 23.0 seconds to first base in 2017. Cabrera's at a playable 25.5 — the average is 27.0 seconds).
Nobody shifts against Cabrera because his spray charts are much more diffuse. He hits the ball anywhere and still hits it hard (more in his bad 2017 season than any Pujols year since 2010). In his career, teams have only shifted against Miggy in 194 at-bats with balls in play. He's very good in those PAs, hitting .354/.351/.438 for a 114 wRC+ (again, this is balls in play minus home runs). The last time anyone bothered to shift against Miggy was 2015, and he hit .525/.512/.625 in 41 PAs.
His back issues are concerning, but whatever decline he may be facing isn't accurately compared to Pujols. JDM is obviously preferred, but there's too much linking us to the Tigers to think DD hasn't considered using his only asset—money—to acquire Miggy and a good young player rather than spend it in free agency.
This approach also applies to taking on an obvious fit in Prado (basically Nunez who can actually play third) to swap Beni and Vazquez for Yelich and Realmuto.
I can't really speak to that, I'm just passing on what my friend said. I could be that they don't have to negotiate against amateur players for MLB money; he also mentioned Perfect Game by name as someone charging an awful lot (and controlling the pipeline, maybe the PU thinks that should be under their aegis?)
Again, I can't say for certain and I don't want to misrepresent my discussion as a Union position. I think the PU got taken in the last negotiation, and lay the blame at Clark's feet, but ultimately their membership ratified the deal (my friend mentioned that it sounded like the PU was really worried about a work stoppage, but that seems really unlikely to me). The PU would seem to be juggling several different interests, from different player factions to maintaining competitive balance, but I really can't figure out how they let spending get tamped down on bring in new talent (IFA, drafted players) without also then directing the remaining money towards veterans by easing the CBT. That seemed like a no-brainer, so the issue is figuring out why it happened...
Savin Hillbilly dug into it a bit here: http://sonsofsamhorn.net/index.php?threads/the-killer-bs-in-2018-whats-in-the-box.21885/#post-2593116
May be too cute, but Yelich's batted ball profile is a better fit for our park. Early returns on Beni shows he does most of his damage to right field.
I understand the batted ball profile thing, but Benintendi primarily being a pull hitter doesn't mean he can't be a good Fenway hitter. Yaz, who physically was very similar to Benintendi, derived most of his HR power hitting to right field as well. He himself didn't think Fenway suited him very well as a hitter. He did alright for himself.
Not saying Benintendi is going to be Yaz or anything, I just don't think batted ball profiles, especially based on barely 800 big league plate appearances, should be the basis for thinking he's expendable. Yelich is a fine player, but maybe not that much better to justify the greater age and increased salary (to be fair, team control is the same).
Not saying Benintendi is going to be Yaz or anything, I just don't think batted ball profiles, especially based on barely 800 big league plate appearances, should be the basis for thinking he's expendable. Yelich is a fine player, but maybe not that much better to justify the greater age and increased salary (to be fair, team control is the same).
Age isn't really a factor here. You're talking about 5 years of control of Benintendi through age 27 (he'll turn 28 in July of that season), and 4 years of control over Yelich through age 29 (He turned 26 this month). If you want to harp on the year of control being lost, okay. But both players are under control in their primes, so there's no reason to think they would decline before that control runs out.
And their overall profiles are pretty similar, but I do buy into the batted ball profile differences. I think Yelich would be a better Fenway hitter and that does add up. Take a look at his spray charts with a Fenway overlay for the last two seasons:
2016
2017
That looks like 8 fly outs from 2016 that would have been singles or better in Fenway, 13
And 17 fly outs that could have been singles, doubles or more from 2017, plus another four pop outs in foul territory that wouldn't have been in play. Plus 9
Obviously not all of these would have been hit in Fenway, but those spray charts look really good with that overlay.
Edit: Yellow is doubles not singles.
Last edited:
On Cabrera...
First the raw standard numbers over the past two seasons:
2016: 595 ab, 38 hr, .316/.393/.563/.956, 155 ops+, 5.5 oWAR (b-ref)
2017: 469 ab, 16 hr, .249/.329/.399/.728, 92 ops+, 0.0 oWAR (b-ref)
Now a closer look:
BABIP
2016: .336
2017: .292 (when he put the ball in play, it turned into an out more often than last year)
ISO
2016: .247
2017: .149
HR%
2016: 5.6%
2017: 3.0%
K%
2016: 17.1%
2017: 20.8% (more strikeouts per AB)
K/BB
2016: 1.55
2017: 2.04 (striking out a lot more versus walks)
GB/FB
2016: 0.75
2017: 0.68 (hitting more fly balls than ground balls than last year)
LD%
2016: 29%
2017: 32% (hitting more line drives (percentage wise) than last year)
HR/FB
2016: 14.9%
2017: 7.8% (just not hitting these fly balls out of the park)
IF/FB
2016: 8%
2017: 5% (indicating that he's hitting more fly balls to the OF rather than pop ups)
Exit Velocity
2016: 95.0
2017: 91.0 (indicating that he's hitting the ball less hard on average than last year)
So it's weird - he hit more line drives (percentage-wise) than last year, and more fly balls, especially to the OF, and yet his BABIP was much lower. That lower BABIP, combined with a higher K ratio, led to some pretty poor offensive numbers. Also, though he hit more line drives, his average exit velocity was much lower, so on the whole, much softer contact. (though his avg exit velocity was still 28th in all of MLB, ahead of guys like Cano, Yelich, Duda, Cespedes, Chris Davis, Devers, Pederson, and Bird)
Long story short, there's not a ton in here that would make me encouraged if the Sox made a trade for him, unless they handed Detroit nothing of real value AND Detroit picked up most of his salary (by most I mean like 2/3 of it at least). MAYBE then could you take a reasonable risk.
First the raw standard numbers over the past two seasons:
2016: 595 ab, 38 hr, .316/.393/.563/.956, 155 ops+, 5.5 oWAR (b-ref)
2017: 469 ab, 16 hr, .249/.329/.399/.728, 92 ops+, 0.0 oWAR (b-ref)
Now a closer look:
BABIP
2016: .336
2017: .292 (when he put the ball in play, it turned into an out more often than last year)
ISO
2016: .247
2017: .149
HR%
2016: 5.6%
2017: 3.0%
K%
2016: 17.1%
2017: 20.8% (more strikeouts per AB)
K/BB
2016: 1.55
2017: 2.04 (striking out a lot more versus walks)
GB/FB
2016: 0.75
2017: 0.68 (hitting more fly balls than ground balls than last year)
LD%
2016: 29%
2017: 32% (hitting more line drives (percentage wise) than last year)
HR/FB
2016: 14.9%
2017: 7.8% (just not hitting these fly balls out of the park)
IF/FB
2016: 8%
2017: 5% (indicating that he's hitting more fly balls to the OF rather than pop ups)
Exit Velocity
2016: 95.0
2017: 91.0 (indicating that he's hitting the ball less hard on average than last year)
So it's weird - he hit more line drives (percentage-wise) than last year, and more fly balls, especially to the OF, and yet his BABIP was much lower. That lower BABIP, combined with a higher K ratio, led to some pretty poor offensive numbers. Also, though he hit more line drives, his average exit velocity was much lower, so on the whole, much softer contact. (though his avg exit velocity was still 28th in all of MLB, ahead of guys like Cano, Yelich, Duda, Cespedes, Chris Davis, Devers, Pederson, and Bird)
Long story short, there's not a ton in here that would make me encouraged if the Sox made a trade for him, unless they handed Detroit nothing of real value AND Detroit picked up most of his salary (by most I mean like 2/3 of it at least). MAYBE then could you take a reasonable risk.
This is helpful but I’m not sure it’s the best/only way to frame it. Cabrera had the second-lowest soft contact rate among MLB hitters last year (9.8 percent). For comparison, Stanton was at 20.8.
He may have dropped slightly from his previously elite levels, but he’s not making soft contact. He may have just been hurt.
Last edited:
He had a ruptured disc in his back. If he's healed, the Hall of Fame hitter might come back, if he's not, he could be done. If I'm the Tigers, I hold on to him into the spring in the hopes that he looks good and try to move him for prospects. Sure, there's a chance they get stuck with nothing, but I don't think they're going to get anything amazing for him relying on the other team taking the risk.
Recovery to full capacity is a 50/50 thing. If he abides by all the recovery requirements he may come back to full strength. The key is him lowering his weight and keeping it there. If he recovers fully then he would be pretty much back (no pun intended) to his old self. The chances of re-injury are high if he does not keep his weight down and does not continue the PT regiment. I believe Miggy is enough of a professional not to pull a Panda on us and let his weight just go out of control. He will work hard to return and will likely be in better shape than he has been over the last 3-4 years.
Physical concerns aside if Detroit accepts Hanley's contract in return then we get him for the 1st two years for basically $8 million/year more than we are currently paying Hanley. After that if Detroit picks up $10 million over the next 2 years and $12 Million the last two then we get Miggy for $140 million (includes what we would have paid Hanley) for 6 years. If healthy I think he's got 150 - 180 home runs still in him.
Physical concerns aside if Detroit accepts Hanley's contract in return then we get him for the 1st two years for basically $8 million/year more than we are currently paying Hanley. After that if Detroit picks up $10 million over the next 2 years and $12 Million the last two then we get Miggy for $140 million (includes what we would have paid Hanley) for 6 years. If healthy I think he's got 150 - 180 home runs still in him.
I have a had three ruptured disks in my back. Depending on the nature of the injury (The disk that is ruptured and the intensity of the rupture) laser surgery can be performed that repairs the disk. However, unless you take care of yourself afterwards the injury can return, generally as bad if not more sever. Any injury not cared for can come back to haunt you later ... that would be my knees.
So he didn't hit as many soft balls as others, but he didn't hit as many hard balls as he's used to either. Still ranked #28 in MLB in exit velocity so it's not like he's a chump when it comes to hitting the ball hard on average. But we wouldn't be trading for, and paying for a run of the mill hitter. We're looking for elite. I don't know that he's elite anymore.
Yes they are. It would surprise you how many people don't know that. You win the pop quiz extra credit.
If his issues with hitting was the disk then if he recovers well he will likely return to his old self. Maybe for a couple of years and then he'll fade. However, a fading Miggy may be better than most in their prime. Ortiz was amazing at 40. Maybe Miggy will be the same.
Yeah, there wasn't much risk there. He was basically on the Wakefield plan, just with slightly better results.
Sources: #RedSox showing continued trade interest in Manny Machado, as I reported this hour on @MLBNetwork in our #MLBTonightsegment with @MattYallofMLB.
Last edited:
So what do folks think is a fair offer for Machado? I hope it's not the X/ERod/Chavis offer I've heard floated (Cafardo?). That seems like a vast overpay for one year of Manny.
Assuming we're offering X (to avoid the complication of flipping him elsewhere), and understanding that the O's want pitching,, I think X + ERod is still too much for one year. X + Brian Johnson? And maybe add an expendable middle reliever, or a mid-level prospect (Sharwyn, who pitched for Maryland)?
Or maybe we have to make it a three-way deal - if Duquette wants two young SPs, maybe we can pick them up in a deal for X, and flip them to the Os.
Assuming we're offering X (to avoid the complication of flipping him elsewhere), and understanding that the O's want pitching,, I think X + ERod is still too much for one year. X + Brian Johnson? And maybe add an expendable middle reliever, or a mid-level prospect (Sharwyn, who pitched for Maryland)?
Or maybe we have to make it a three-way deal - if Duquette wants two young SPs, maybe we can pick them up in a deal for X, and flip them to the Os.
This is where it’s interesting. Miggy has a .400 career wOBA, which is a top 10-15 hitter over the last 50 years (and that includes some steroid era hitters). He’s the definition of elite.
After David Ortiz’s bad 2009, he went on to produce 20.4 brWAR of value the next six seasons (and another 5.1 the seventh). That’s not something to bank on, but there might be a figure at which it makes more sense for us to gamble on it than the Tigers, who don’t have a DH spot t move him to.
If Detroit sends us $100M in cash and player value and takes on Hanley, I’d be interested.
Well yes, over the course of his career, Cabrera is one of the greatest RH hitters in the history of the sport. That's not the question. The question is what kind of hitter is he NOW and what kind of hitter will he be over the rest of his contract. I daresay it would be incredibly optimistic to think he will be nearly as good moving forward as he has been in the past.
