Offseason rumors/discussion thread

[CSF77]

Might be impossible for Wilson IMO. He is pretty high energy and this is more of a refined talent.

Russell vs Baez at SS. smooth looks calm and easy vs rocket man getting dirty.

Way I look at it anyways. Wilson is what he is. He is akin to Javy. Calm is smooth is really not him. He is more about energy.

 

[TL1961]

I never thought Montero was brought here for his defensive abilities. The guy could never throw out base runners. But I guess he had to cheat to get strikes to keep his job.

He was among the best framers in MLB, and was brought here almost exclusively for defense. Again, a catcher's D is about SO much more than throwing out runners. (which Montero couldn't do).

 

[TL1961]

Framing has much to do with a catchers helmet as his mitt.

If a catcher is moving his head with the pitch then it leads to ump to think that if is making more or less effort to catch the ball. It is a small thing but a catcher that is able to keep his core tight and move his glove to recieve vs his whole body will tend to get more strikes.

Basically pitcher has command and the ball is going where the catcher expects. Or is he wild and got the catcher jumping around.

So that is a big part of it. It is really not about stealing strikes it is more about not giving them up.

Well, I agree with most of this, but it is absolutely about stealing strikes. But you are right about movement. Also, it is simply how a catcher holds his glove in many cases. If it looks like you stabbed at the ball, you won't get the call.

You discussed Contreras being "not smooth" similar to Javy. On one hand it seemed an excuse for being high energy and we just have to live with it, which I don't understand. But on the other hand, "smooth" is what it is all about.

I am not saying I like the fact that umps suck so bad we have to rely on catchers to steal strikes. But that is the situation, and it only makes sense to work within that system as best we can.

 

[CubsFaninMN]

Well, I agree with most of this, but it is absolutely about stealing strikes. But you are right about movement. Also, it is simply how a catcher holds his glove in many cases. If it looks like you stabbed at the ball, you won't get the call.

You discussed Contreras being "not smooth" similar to Javy. On one hand it seemed an excuse for being high energy and we just have to live with it, which I don't understand. But on the other hand, "smooth" is what it is all about.

I am not saying I like the fact that umps suck so bad we have to rely on catchers to steal strikes. But that is the situation, and it only makes sense to work within that system as best we can.

No, it *only* makes sense to go to the electronic strike zone. Those who say they like the ambiguity of the ball.strike calls being influenced by umpires who can't tell where the ball was and are distracted in their judgment by the motions of the catcher, then why not embrace the ambiguity of field umps missing tag and force calls? We have instant replay to get that right; why not use similar technology to *always* get the pitch calls correct?

It's coming; we need to have old fuddy-duddies to stop digging their heels in on it...

-Doug

 

[Diehardfan]

No, it *only* makes sense to go to the electronic strike zone. Those who say they like the ambiguity of the ball.strike calls being influenced by umpires who can't tell where the ball was and are distracted in their judgment by the motions of the catcher, then why not embrace the ambiguity of field umps missing tag and force calls? We have instant replay to get that right; why not use similar technology to *always* get the pitch calls correct?

It's coming; we need to have old fuddy-duddies to stop digging their heels in on it...

-Doug

I've been saying this for three years. AnotherIdiot is 100% correct when he calls it cheating....that's all it is. Preying on the weak minded or maybe bullheaded umpires to get strikes for their pitchers that they don't deserve. You'd think these guys would look at some film and say.."Hey, these catchers are making me look stupid". My guess is that most don't care...do the job, grab their paycheck and go home.

 

[Castor76]

I've been saying this for three years. AnotherIdiot is 100% correct when he calls it cheating....that's all it is. Preying on the weak minded or maybe bullheaded umpires to get strikes for their pitchers that they don't deserve. You'd think these guys would look at some film and say.."Hey, these catchers are making me look stupid". My guess is that most don't care...do the job, grab their paycheck and go home.

Just to argue the other side, because I actually do agree that an electronic strike zone is needed, but the other plus to good framing is not losing your pitcher strikes because of the way you react to a pitch. I'd say it's also likely that a catcher will move versus target and "convince" the ump that the pitch must have been a ball.

No excuse on the ump's part, but a portion of the calls being affected probably go this way as well.

 

[TL1961]

No, it *only* makes sense to go to the electronic strike zone. Those who say they like the ambiguity of the ball.strike calls being influenced by umpires who can't tell where the ball was and are distracted in their judgment by the motions of the catcher, then why not embrace the ambiguity of field umps missing tag and force calls? We have instant replay to get that right; why not use similar technology to *always* get the pitch calls correct?

It's coming; we need to have old fuddy-duddies to stop digging their heels in on it...

-Doug

So, are you saying if they don't go to electronic strikes, it makes no sense to frame pitches?

 

[Diehardfan]

So, are you saying if they don't go to electronic strikes, it makes no sense to frame pitches?

Where did he say that? All he's saying is that if the so-called baseball purists don't want the electronic strike zone, why should we have electronic replays for on the field plays?

If the league had any stones at all....they'd tell every umpire that deems a catcher to be framing to make the call an automatic ball....better yet, a walk on any count. Of course, that would lead to a slew of arguments but would eventually put pitch framing to rest.

 

[CubsFaninMN]

Aha! I was right! Brad Brach did have a problem come up from his physical. He had mononucleosis!

That led to the Cubs restructuring his original contract, per the latest report. He can still make most of the payout from the original agreement if he hits all his bonus levels and the club picks up his option next year. But the guaranteed is less and the total possible value is lower by about $1.5 million.

I knew it was odd that the official signing took until the day before pitchers and catchers reported to get finalized, three weeks after the first reports of the agreement.

-Doug

 

[beckdawg]

Aha! I was right! Brad Brach did have a problem come up from his physical. He had mononucleosis!

That led to the Cubs restructuring his original contract, per the latest report. He can still make most of the payout from the original agreement if he hits all his bonus levels and the club picks up his option next year. But the guaranteed is less and the total possible value is lower by about $1.5 million.

I knew it was odd that the official signing took until the day before pitchers and catchers reported to get finalized, three weeks after the first reports of the agreement.

-Doug

don't kiss him

 

[beckdawg]

So, the mexican league and the MLB came to an agreement today on player transfer. This is likely good news for the cubs as they've pulled a lot of talent out of mexico the past few years and have seemingly good connections there. Previously the MLB halted signings from mexico because teams were taking too much of the players cut of money.

 

[beckdawg]

Regarding the previous talk in this thread about Darvish being the "best of his career" something I'd sort of forgotten were the reports he's supposedly come to camp really in shape. I know that's quite the cliche but supposedly he'd added something like 25 lbs of muscle. Given he was also rehabbing a lot during the offseason that wouldn't really shock me. But, that could very likely be why we're seeing an uptick in his velocity.

 

[CSF77]

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2019...-of-harper-comments-on-trout-recruitment.html

 

[anotheridiot]

was Harper officially signed when he made the comment?

 

[anotheridiot]

Regarding the previous talk in this thread about Darvish being the "best of his career" something I'd sort of forgotten were the reports he's supposedly come to camp really in shape. I know that's quite the cliche but supposedly he'd added something like 25 lbs of muscle. Given he was also rehabbing a lot during the offseason that wouldn't really shock me. But, that could very likely be why we're seeing an uptick in his velocity.

Someone else did this recently, maybe the past 5 years where a pitcher came in jacked and lost flexibility due to the muscle mass. I cant remember who it was.

 

[CSF77]

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2019/03/mlb-mlbpa-nearing-rule-change-agreement.html

 

[zack54attack]

was Harper officially signed when he made the comment?

Don't think so. Could be wrong.

 

[zack54attack]

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2019/03/mlb-mlbpa-nearing-rule-change-agreement.html

So how long until MLB expands into Mexico?

 

[CubsFaninMN]

So how long until MLB expands into Mexico?

I'm not a big fan of MLB expansion from where it stands right now. As it is, a club only plays two series -- one home, one away -- with any given club outside of their own division. And due to the "natural rivalries" that have been set up by the schedulers for inter-league play, there is always one club in the other league's division that gets only one series with their inter-league division that year. For example, a few years ago when the Cubs played Boston, there was one series only, at Wrigley. When they got to play at Fenway in '17, it had been six years since the Cubs had played in Boston. Same thing happened with the Cubs and the Twins -- in 2015, they played one series, in Minneapolis. Last year, they played one series, in Chicago.

So, as a Cubs fan in Minneapolis, who can't easily travel to Chicago for baseball games, I get one series every six years where I can expect to be able to go see them in person. Why? Because the Cubs and White Sox have to play extra, extended series years when the Cubs play the AL Central, due to the natural rivalry clause.

If MLB expands again, then sure, bring in a Mexican team. Or, if you can get the politicians to make it happen, have a Havana team. But you'd almost have to do away with inter-league play, or just expect that in any given year there would be teams in your own league you would never play. There's no room in the year to add enough games to the regular season to avoid this if MLB expanded by between four and eight teams. We're already playing games in late winter and early winter, at least as far as the weather is concerned. You gonna play the World Series around Thanksgiving when you might be playing outdoors? In Chicago, or New York, or Minnesota?

I know you were just tossing out a line, there. But I just think any talk about having teams in different cities ought to focus on small-market teams moving out of their current cities and into larger market cities. Like, Tampa Bay or Seattle, or even the Twinkies, might make more money in Mexico City than in in their current locales...

-Doug

 

[anotheridiot]

As long as there are teams who will not sign a star, dont have the fans to even make a dent of filling a stadium, they should push owners to move to a city that wants a baseball team and will support it.