FT35

I don't know...if I'm the Cubs, I'm stuck. They're 4.5 games back from an overachieving Milwaukee team who always fades late...6.5 back in the Wild Card. They have essentially the same team as last year that won. About everyone in their core group is under-performing well below what they are capable of--but they are all still intact. I feel like they are a cold shooter on a basketball court. All they need is to see the ball go through the hoop--string a few wins together, see a few studs start to heat up and the team will take off and still win the division by a half-dozen games. I'm not sure if I were them--a year removed from dealing Gleyber Torres, if I'm ready to send off Jimenez or anything else of that level of significance when they have a World Championship caliber roster as it is now. If they can add a SP, without giving up another pillar of strength from their system, I think they will do it, but I don't see them unloading another haul from their system to acquire someone like Sonny Gray or Verlander who is doing the SAME thing the rest of their players are doing--underachieving. If I'm the Cubs--which I'm not--I'm not dealing Eloy, Happ, or anyone of that talent to acquire anything but TOP, long-term potential talent in return. I'd move some lesser pieces and take on salary for a guy like Verlander in hopes he turns it around, but yikes...to see them gut their system for someone who has been kicked around like a beach ball on a summer day is a head-scratcher to me. A Trevor Cahill re-acquisition seems more likely because the price is right. If they decide to go for broke, I think you'll see a run at someone like Yu Darvish rather than Sonny Gray--someone who can be a confident regular in a short playoff rotation.

I kinda want to hear his solution! How he thinks we should be doing things. Is he the guy who sits in the back of the room and just constantly finds something wrong with everyone's ideas but has none of his own or does he actually have an alternative solution that would work!? We're taking the same route that successful GMs have taken to pull a losing franchise back into relevancy, but for some reason it's wrong when we take the proven track record path that other organizations have taken. There's never any sort of thought behind the complaint--any sort of direction moving towards an alternate way of doing things...it just starts and ends with a complaint. Come forward! Step right up to the box and lay out the master plan behind all the sarcasm and doubt to the way we're doing things! Just make sure it's air tight, because all of us will "help you" seek out any holes in your theory in the same way you have "helped us" see the holes in ours. Readyyyyyyyyy GO! We're all ears! Teach us!!

I always liked him when he was here. I'd often cringe and look away when he came up to bat, but he called a good game and was very humble about his success. He knew he wasn't some super star and he never pretended that he was--gave good humble answers in interviews, took responsibility for his shortcomings and gave it his all when he was here. I'm glad he's finding his nitch.

QUOTE (The Baconator @ Jul 5, 2017 -> 03:43 PM) As many have mentioned before, we need other teams to be in need of closers for the Nats to really get into a bidding war, or at least feel any added outside motivation. My thought is look at the league leaders in blown save opportunities and work those angles hard. The Nats needs relievers. Desperately. If we start selling off relievers to other clubs, they'll see we aren't just waiting for them to pick up the phone. TeamRank Blown Saves Games Back from WC 1 Texas 17 3.5 3 NY Yankees 15 +1 5 Tampa Bay 15 0 6 Washington 14 - 8 Seattle 13 3 12 LA Angels 12 2.5 All of these teams are competing for a wildcard or division spot and rank among the teams with most blown saves. There's ample opportunity to make moves with other teams (once teams become motivated to buy) that will net us pieces and force other teams' hand. Yankees are back to full strength. Seattle has Diaz throwing well again, Angels' BS issue came from not having Bedrosian who is now back. Colome is probably just going through a rough patch--he's one of the top closers in the AL so he'll probably come out of it. Really cuts this list down to Texas and Washington as the teams who have struggled and don't have much of a solution in-house. I think Texas is a piece or 2 away from seriously going on a run--they might think they can right the Matt Bush ship eventually. All signs point to Washington as the main team who will lay it on the line to get a shut down closer. What concerns me is that usually when a team is 1 main piece away from dominating at an elite level, they find a way to acquire elite talent to fill the void. Look at Cleveland and Andrew Miller and the Cubs and Chapman. I'm not sure Washington sees D-Rob as the answer simply because he's seemingly the best available and better than what they have. I think you'll see them broaden their search beyond who we all THINK is available and look to add someone like Osuna from Toronto--or maybe even Zach Britton if he's for sure healthy. If Baltimore and Toronto claw back into it, then D-Rob comes back into play--I just don't get the feeling that Robertson is the Nationals' #1 target as much as he is a fallback plan--he's good but not elite. That is certainly reflected in who they are willing to give up to get him. Certainly the ability to add another strong bullpen piece helps our case.

QUOTE (hi8is @ Jul 5, 2017 -> 10:00 PM) If the waiving team decides to let him go for the salary relief alone, then yes.... see Alex Rios to the White Sox as an example. I guess in my mind that makes sense it just never clicked for some reason...I always thought you had so much time to trade him and if you couldn't work out a deal, there was no transaction. Like with Rios, I thought we just wanted him and therefore agreed to pay his salary. Knowing that the team who owns the rights to a player can change gears in a trade negotiation and essentially add them to your books regardless of additional consent (past the waiver claim) makes putting in a waiver claim a lot more risky. So the move for a team to claim someone to block another team from acquiring him isn't all that safe because you could be stuck with him if the team who owns the player on waivers decides to just assign them to you. I guess that would be keep teams honest!

QUOTE (hi8is @ Jul 5, 2017 -> 02:54 PM) If this happened and someone claimed him on waivers but we couldn't "reach a deal" -- we'd still cut ties with him and the claiming team would take on his remaining salary obligations. It's very likely Todd is gone. Interesting...Is this true even if a team claims him just to block him from going somewhere else? They're on the hook $ wise if we cut him?

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Jul 5, 2017 -> 02:40 PM) A team could buy a Holland or Pelfrey even to just help get through the second half (for example: you want to give some young starters some rest). I can see that...but I don't know...I might want to use someone from my own system before I gave up a prospect to get someone from someone else's team to save my starters. I'd rather plug in a AAA prospect occasionally to get him some MLB experience. Plus I would have to have a pretty big lead to have that luxury. It could happen though. Happened before.

Predictions: Melky to Tampa Bay or Arizona. Probably won't get much but both these teams have huge OF holes and will offer up something to fix that problem for the stretch run. I think the Nats cave on Robertson--but wouldn't be surprised if they try to solve all their pen issues with one deal and want Kahnle but settle for Swarzak as a part of things. We will still have to pick up part of DRob's salary and will not receive Victor Robles for our generosity--however we could still end up with a solid return. I think Frazier will be dangled but there will be no takers--Teams in search of a 3B will go hard after Josh Donaldson till the deadline hits. If Donaldson doesn't get moved, someone will claim Todd off waivers but no deal will be reached. Soxtalk will be forced to somehow make sense of this. I think the ship has sailed on the Miguel Gonzalez project...5 runs or more in 6 of last 9 outings doesn't bode well for a contender. Same thing goes for Derek Holland--the door is quickly shutting with 4 of last 6 outings of 5 runs or more. ERA from 2.37-4.52...yeah, I'm probably not buying that if I'm a contender. The real James Shields IS standing up. He's not worth a prospect if I'm a contender. They weren't moved prior to this point because EVERYONE and their non-baseball following grandmothers saw this fall coming for all 3 of these guys. Kahnle will stay.

Never been a fan of fan voting. The all Royal starting lineup was exhibit A. How embarrassing. The best way to make it "for the fans" is to put the best players out there. And what about all the players who designate their careers to be the best? They deserve to be recognized among the best. To watch Alcides Escobar start for the AL in 2015 was a flat out joke--while the Manny Machado's of the world sit and watch despite putting in the time to be the best. And why...because KC had the best FACEBOOK campaign!? What a joke--the rest of the MLB fans sit through the goofiness and roll their eyes till the real players start coming off the bench as subs. We should let the players determine who plays in the game...next thing we'll see is a freaking FACEBOOK campaign to see which teams should play in the World Series....Sorry Astros...The Detroit Tigers had more likes on their Instagram pics this year so they are going to represent the AL in the World Series...just wait for it...it's coming. Now I will say the rosters this year are pretty strong...not sure about Zack Cozart starting for the NL over Corey Seager--that's sort of a joke, but at least it's not a big social movement to see "how many San Diego Padres we can vote in because they are the worst team--wouldn't that be funny" sort of thing.

Gotta remember--we gave up Micah Johnson, Frankie Montas and Trayce Thompson for Frazier...at the time that was a big hit to our system. We might not come close to that haul now, but I wouldn't be surprised if there was another team who would give up something of value outside of a washed-up injury-riddled guy who is not performing at the lower minor league levels. Current performance is heavily weighted, but recent history DOES still mean something. Todd Frazier is established, a good leader, can play a decent 3rd base and can get hot and carry a MLB team. When his swing is right, he's a consistent HR threat in the middle of the order--sometimes a change of scenery makes all the difference for a player like that.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jun 28, 2017 -> 12:52 PM) And it sickens me. They haven't called a strike a strike for so many years now. All because of the umps' union. The umps laugh at baseball year after year as they ump the game the way they want to. Then we have threads about how there are very few Hall-of-Fame caliber pitchers in the game today. While the hitters' list is disproportionately long--and yes I'm still talking about the HOF list..........

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 28, 2017 -> 11:47 AM) Doesn't the tin foil get itchy on your head? Love your posts...but honestly I don't see anything wrong with what he said. I think it's very true. MLB owns the umpires--they push their agenda/brand of baseball through them as well. Wow factor sells tickets. Offense creates the most wow factor. NFL has evolved to a pass-heavy product. NHL took out the 2-line pass to open up game flow to promote more offense, 3-on-3 OTs really open up the game--not to mention the addition of the shootout. NBA 3-pointers are up by about 5000% as are full court long passes/game, and now strangely baseball Homerun rates are astoundingly high. If you think it's merely a coincidence, your head is in the sand. MLB's branding focus is on the offense. If good defense happens along the way, great. But 9 out of 10 people buy tickets to Yankees' games to see if Aaron Judge homers again...not to see C.C. Sabathia get the benefit of a high strike call. Plus in our society which is now grossly infatuated with self-promotion, social media content and has placed all focus on the individual rather than the team, nothing fits that brand better than the home run. It does wonders for click bait numbers--2 video clip choices: another moon shot HR by Judge, or a high fastball on a 2-1 pitch for a called strike 2...um....CLICK. Umpires are doing their part. They cut down the high strike calls because it's tough to turn around a high fastball for a HR. Pitchers basically have to throw the ball through a thimble to get a called strike and to hitters...that translates to more offense. It's not a conspiracy, it's business...it's the marketing of the sport that drives the game play changes--it doesn't just happen.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jun 26, 2017 -> 06:54 PM) All I can say is I agree. The draft is a ridiculous crapshoot. The best way to win is sign guys like Abreu and (hopefully) Robert. I'm in favor of that cause I could give a s*** about how much money Jerry spends since the chairman and his peeps do not care about us spending 9 bucks for a hot dog and whatever it costs to park at a game. Add to signing guys like Robert SMART drafting when your pick comes up as well as FREE AGENCY, you know, signing guys who have already done it and proven they can do it. You can't change people's minds. Draft-niks won't admit it, but they are part of the sports cliche -- you know, the one that always is more interested in future names than current ones. I won't change my opinion; they won't change theirs. So be it. But there are so many busts out there who are deemed "prospects." Absolutely! But...I don't think it's that simple. First off--to get 1 of these guys you have to outbid all the other teams. Once you win that bid ($$$$$), you're still facing the bust factor (Viciedo). And if you MISS, then you are WAY behind because most of your $ is still wrapped up in that bust. Building a team is kind of like business sales. Cold calling if you will. Yes, draft picks are like cold calling! You win with volume. You get enough of them and some pan out--most will fail. From a team construction standpoint, you want to make sure you start your cold calling with a good qualified lead list, but even those surefire prospects fall through like many "can't-miss" sales deals do. BUT, it still shouldn't stop you from the process because there aren't too many other ways of doing it since we can't see into the future to see who turns out to be the best players. It's also the most affordable way to add players to your system. Adding Abreu's and Robert's is AWESOME, (even if they have a higher likelihood of success) but unsustainable from a cost standpoint and VERY risky when you factor in the bust potential. Free Agents and "names of today"trades aren't the best bet either. Has it worked for us? Adam Dunn? Jake Peavy? Adam LaRoche? Todd Frazier? Jeff Samardzija? Brett Lawrie? Jeff Keppinger? Connor Gillespie? Dioneer Navarro? Alex Avila? Austin Jackson? Jimmy Rollins? The Great Cody Asche? That's a LOT of money and a LOT of missing to add 1 maybe 2 OK pieces to your core...Melky?? Robertson?? Those guys are your harvest and it cost hundreds of millions of dollars and a LOT of losing to add them. In the same amount of time, we've added Sale, Anderson, Rodon, Sanchez, Avi, Leury, Davidson, Moncada, Giolito, Kopech and a handful of other nice pieces by going the prospect route. These guys are making nothing compared to the FA busts. When you have to add a bulk number of players to an organization, the rebuild/draft way is the best way to do that. When you get good and you're on the verge of competing for the MLB playoffs...THAT's when you drop some coin on a FA or acquiring a big name in a trade who can push you over the top. IE...Aroldis Chapman, Andrew Miller...etc...

I wonder if Bregman is any more available now after his modest 2017 start. Probably not, but I think the meter should go both ways...if Q's value is allowed to be perceived as lower after his mediocre start, then so should any prospects' who start slow!

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Jun 22, 2017 -> 07:59 AM) Exactly. I don't think they were planning on being good this year. I can see them dealing some prospect depth for a rental type without touching the big prospects and just rolling with that and seeing how it pans out. I don't think they were planning on it either...but with the play they have gotten out of their young guys--and their OFers in particular--you can't help but to notice that they aren't too far away from being legitimate title contenders. They know the post season is all about rolling and riding your top 3 starting pitchers--as of now I think they are wondering just how far Tanaka and Pineda can take them. It's tough to count on a rookie like Severino to perform consistently through a title run--but they might have to. So much can change, but they would likely face a Cleveland or Houston first and those 2 teams have the best chance of containing their big offense. They need more than Tanaka and Pineda and they know that! My prediction: Yankees will make a deal for a top 3 SP--and it will come before their potential post-season opponent--the Astros--can make that same acquisition. Once that happens...Houston will follow suit with an add of their own. Neither team will gut their system--but both will likely overpay. Boys will be boys.

QUOTE (shipps @ Jun 21, 2017 -> 01:54 PM) I may totally be off base here but it sure seems like in the past ten years or so the Sox have done a bunch of moves were everyone said they are too cheap and way to financially conscious to do. They can only prove that theory wrong so many times before I tend to believe they arent as cheap as some people make them out to be. They create that perception because the design of their teams have led them to make those types of decisions. Over the last decade, they have fielded a team with above average talent on paper but still were left with holes to plug each year. So...that led them to find the bargain type players or look for the 1-year deals until the opportunity to sign a long term "fix" came up. They had no farm system to turn to and they were stuck in the Free Agent vortex of overpaying for average talent. That would limit them from offering up BIG $ to the better players and people started to label them as "cheap" because of it. Add to that model the lack of ANY legitimate post-season success to justify taking a large financial risk and you've got a pattern of financial hesitancy caused by your tendency to plug holes and roll the dice on players way past their primes with no payoff outside a dwindling fan base (which only complicates matters). I don't think they're as cheap as they are reluctant.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 21, 2017 -> 01:09 PM) I really feel like that ship sailed with JR's check to Luis Robert and MLB's tax fund. +1!!!

QUOTE (OmarComing25 @ Jun 21, 2017 -> 09:45 AM) Wait why would the heart of the order come up in the 9th inning more often than not, that doesn't make sense. It's just one of those things that seems to happen more times than not. I've scoured the internet for a number but it's tough to find. You hear announcers talk about it a lot--even Hawk refers to it sometimes as "just the way Abner designed it." If nothing else, you're usually facing the 3 best eligible bats when you factor in the pinch hitting that takes place.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jun 20, 2017 -> 04:52 PM) Holds don't equal saves but blown holds equal blown saves. That's my issue with your stats. I don't hate the logic. In reality the stats don't always equal out. Many times a guy could come in with the bases loaded and 0 outs--throw a sac fly bringing in the runner from third--then strike out 2 to end the inning--and still gets tagged with the blown hold. To me those "hot potato" situations aren't the easiest to hang a negative stat on a reliever who came in and faced 3 batters and got 3 outs. Whereas many blown saves happen from starting the 9th inning fresh with no base runners. Also the 9th inning is a different animal in many ways--pinch hitters galore, the heart of the order more times than not, the crowd...etc... Maybe your logic would sit better if we were just talking clean-inning blown holds/saves--even though the 9th inning element is still looming.

QUOTE (Jerksticks @ Jun 20, 2017 -> 10:51 PM) I'm not too worried about the low walk total. He's barreling the ball almost every AB. I think another few months or next year he will start getting the full respect from pitchers. Right now he's probably labeled as "Cmon, I've faced this guy the last few years...he ain't THAT dangerous". Keep it up Avi and you'll be relabled as "Uh oh, better be extra careful here". Then I think the walks will trend upward. Super impressed so far. Best thing that could have happened this year for the Sox. I agree! Although strange, it's a great thing for us! In spring training, I was on board with wiping the slate clean--there really weren't any players other than maybe Abreu and Anderson who I thought we couldn't rebuild without. To have guys like Avi, Yolmer, Leury, Matt Davidson, Derek Holland and Tommy Kahnle step up and show they can be quality MLB players over longer stretches of time like they have--it's really encouraging. Most of these guys have been waiver worthy for us in the past. Not saying we should build around them...but it's a nice unexpected pool of value to work with that I don't think we had before this season started.

Gotta remember...for teams in the race, the present is heavily weighted in their decisions. A top-100 prospect does nothing to help them now. If you were say the Nationals and you needed bullpen help and had a top-100 prospect in your system who could do what Kahnle is doing right now in the majors, you'd call him up! The problem is...they DON'T have that guy they need in their system. But they do have other good players in their system and if someone told you you could turn that other player into Tommy Kahnle himself, to fill the position you need filled at the MLB level, you'd pull the trigger. You know what Kahnle is capable of doing, you know he fills a need on your team now. No one is talking Robles for Kahnle. That's unrealistic...that would be like us moving Moncada for a solid RP if we were in a pennant race. But I guarantee Kahnle is more valuable to a GM whose team is in the race (and has GLARING bullpen issues) than holding one of his top-100 prospects (whose path to the majors is most likely blocked) in the minors for another year. But then again we're talking about the same organization who shut down Strasburg in the middle of a pennant race and watched their team dwindle to nothing. With Bryce Harper potentially nearing the end of his tenure in Washington, there is a great deal of pressure on the Nationals to win NOW. The whole reason why you play is to be in the pennant race. Sometimes being in that position comes with a price--that's usually prospects. When you're a perennial contender it's usually because your MLB roster is already strong at most positions. Most prospects (who aren't super prospects like Robles), are like kindling. If you're not calling them up to help keep the MLB fire burning, you better be moving them for guys who can help you or else the fire will burn out. Just look at what Washington sacrificed to fill their CF position in December! They are ALL IN--we've been there. It's only a good position to be in if you end up winning it all. The consequence of going all in and not winning it all is...well...we're watching it now with our Sox. Winning it all in Washington is expected--and might be the biggest sales pitch they have to keeping Bryce around for another contract. If I'm a GM, I smell blood in the Washington water. Their prospects are as good as gone by the deadline.

QUOTE (BigHurt3515 @ Jun 20, 2017 -> 10:35 AM) Kahlne has no track record to speak of, I highly doubt we get a top 100 guy for him. If so it will be 80-100 range We're watching his track record now--It's a pretty good one!

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jun 20, 2017 -> 08:20 AM) I think the Nats would trust him 100% more than anyone that steps out of the clown car that they drive out to the mound every save opportunity. The Nationals' version of our Ronald Bellisario days............I still have a twitch even typing that...

QUOTE (Al Lopez's Ghost @ Jun 19, 2017 -> 09:36 AM) Avi's "hot start" began last August 1. I don't have the stats available but I know they're out there. So that's almost a full year of a young player figuring things out. After suffering through his struggles, you'd have to be blown away by any offer, as far as I'm concerned. I think you're right. It seems as if he is well-liked within the organization. I think the fact that he got the extension that he did for this year (despite being as bad as he was) says a lot about how the team feels about him. It would take a great offer from a team who is asking the same question as we are--is this version Avi here to stay?

What we know about Avi's time here: 1. He was acquired in the Peavy to Boston deal with the expectation that he would turn into the player he is right now. 2. In his initial season with us, he showed why he was a highly-touted player in the Detroit system--he hit well for us down the stretch. 3. He got off to a very promising start in his first full season and suffered a pretty bad injury in Colorado--a series where he was really raking. 4. Coming off the injury, he was slow to recover the offensive potential he exhibited before the injury. 5. Things got so bad for him that there were many times where he looked over-matched at the plate AND in the field--as if he did not belong in the major leagues. 6. His talent came in and out--for moments, he would flash his ability to hit plus change-ups with ease and he would excite us with an occasional 2-HR game. 7. The good was very inconsistent and short-lived--leading most to write him off as a bust and someone who was never the same player after his injury. 8. The Sox shocked us all when they resigned him for this season--we all thought he was a big reason why we were bad. 9. He got off to a hot start this season and everyone wrote it off as a fluke. 10. That hot start has only gotten hotter and now most of is are wondering if it's still a fluke because the days were so long ago when he was a very promising young talent. SO...I would hesitate to write him off to a good start...simply because he showed this type of promise coming up--and has shown his ability to be a nice offensive weapon over longer stretches of time IN THE MAJOR LEAGUES. So I guess it's just up to us to see him as the player he showed promise to be a few years ago, or see him as the player who is still struggling after a big injury to discover what made him promising. Chances are he's not this good, and he's not AS bad as he was there on Robin's teams. But if he keeps it up through this season, he sort of reminds me of a Marcell Ozuna type path. If you take the good with the bad, you end up somewhere in the middle. That would put him in the .270-.285/20-25/75-80/75-80/handful of steals category. For outfielders, that production compares to Ozuna and Stephen Piscotty--both 26-years old. Neither player is a super star, but both have demonstrated that they can produce at a certain level for an entire season--showing susceptibility to prolong slumps, but also the ability to carry a team for equal stretches of time. There's value there--both to us and to others. The Sox just need to determine if they want to roll the dice on an extension that would keep him here under the hope that "good-Avi" is here to stay, or cash in on the success he's had this year and move him. Given the state of our system's OF depth, I would think they are leaning towards rolling the dice on keeping him.