FT35

Any inside info on whether he's going to try to give it a go at some point? Health first in this case absolutely...but I'd love to see him able to suit up for us this week--especially if we part ways with him this off-season. Sucks thinking he's played his last game for us.

Shields for Sonny Gray? We flip Shields and bring Sonny in to see if we can Coop him. If not, we're really only out a wild card prospect from an August Shields waiver deal. If it works though...hmmm...

This has been the year of the bullpen. Everyone seems to be trying different things...starting closers, mix and matching back end arms in earlier innings, teaching the mindset of "preparing for a lineup--not an inning." Lots of "experimenting" going on. Has anyone noticed a playoff-caliber team doing these kinds of things on a regular basis? It seems to me like all of these experiments are coming from teams who are desperate for bullpen outs. The liberal use of bullpens seems to strongly correlate to the bad teams! Personally, I think the mindset is just another illustration of why a team is bad in the first place--bad decision making bleeds over into all areas of the game. If bad decision making happens with the bullpen usage, it's probably happening in several other areas of team management and costing the team wins. But look at the playoff-caliber teams this year and you will see nearly all traditionally opperate their bullpen and have a dedicated lights-out closer. LA, Boston, NYY, Seattle, Oakland, Cubs (although injuries), Washington, Arizona, Atlanta, Cleveland. The exceptions are the Phillies (who have had a revolving door for closers) but it's been more performance-based and due to the lack of consistency with any one player over time...and Houston--who went through a time of uncertainty because Ken Giles decided this was the year he would lose his mind. Both those teams are reported to be in talks on all the trade tumors concerning closers. Just think the correlation is too strong to not pair some logic with.

It makes sense why the Twins wouldn't want to sell everything becase of their mediocre year--I think they have a promising core that will be competitive for a nice chunk of years. However, it would make too much sense to them to move Fernando Rodney--who's 41 and on a 1-year deal. I know Boston has shown interest in Rodney, but I think a potential deal involving Rodney could compete with a deal involving Soria (to Boston). Just don't know if I were the Red Sox if I'd want Fernando Rodney or Joakim Soria in there for a 2018 playoff run, but both seem to be pitching well and have a strong recovery time from nights in which they get bombed--which in fairness...hasn't been too often this year.

I was at this game. Mind you, I live in Fort Wayne, IN--that's in Northeast IN. That would be a 4 hour 1-way trip (using the trains). I make it to a game every couple years or so...that was the one.

Welp...he did it last year with MiGo amongst several similar posts as yours! Maybe he can pull it off again? Obviously he won’t get much for either of them if he’s able to get something done. I’m thinking if he IS able to move them, it would not be to a contender, but to a team who DOES move a SP to a contender.

Rodon, Lopez, Covey, maybe Kopech in the 2nd half. Looking at possible minor deals for Miguel Gonzalez and Shields I’m sure. Giolito might need some AAA time to get right again—although I’m not sure he will ever live up to the hype as a TOR starter. Sometimes guys like that ultimately land and find success in the bullpen though so I’m not writing him off. I think he has the stuff to be successful but I’m not sure it will be as a starter.

This is true. You're right reps would help, but so would some lineup help. RIght now he's at the tail end of the Engel/Tilson, Narvaez, Trayce trio. Yoan hitting in front of Sanchez really only benefits Yolmer (actually think Yolmer has the best possible position for success in our lineup). You think Moncada would be producing better numbers in Benitendi's position in that Boston linup? Uh yeah. Might see a pitch or 2 with Betts and JD Martinez waiting. Right now, he's very exposed and pitchers really don't need to show him anything. Except for maybe 1-2 times per game that he's leading off an inning, he's up with 2 outs and nobody on. So does that make him less talented? Are Moncada's skills lacking or are they just not fully applicable yet? Does that mean that Yoan Moncada is the one with issues? He's far from perfect, but I think you will see eye-popping numbers put up when we start packing our lineup with MLB-caliber hitters. My dad always said the famous line while playing Eucher..."when you learn to play with the cards you're dealt, you'll get better ones." Kind of think that's where Moncada is right now...Learning how to play with nothing around him. If he can learn and continue to push through and develop, I think this will only benefit him down the road. Great guys can have good years in bad lineups. However, a great lineup can take someone good and make them great.

Absolutely. Eloy will soon join that group. These are the guys that are a cut above the rest no matter what the numbers suggest at the current moment. If they suddenly lose their ability to play baseball, then we can talk about lowering the expectation. That is simply not happening with Moncada or anyone else from that group. This group (and some not mentioned here may join this group) has the best chance to become full-blown super stars. Will they? Who knows...but people have to start looking at these players for what they are and not that they are striking out a lot in some split matchups. Benintendi is hitting .211 vs. lefties while in the midst of an MVP caliber stretch of baseball. He had 1 HR and 9 RBI against lefties last year for the SEASON--PROSPECT BUST. Albies is hitting .228 vs RHP with 43k's--TOTAL PROSPECT BUST. No one is good.

Yes...Yoan Moncada is one of the young stars in the game right now. Superstar? No not yet...it's important to keep the terms straight though. Moncada belongs in this group--solely based on what he has shown already: Albies, Acuna, Benintendi, Moncada, Hoskins, Torres, Bellinger, Bregman... Not a single guy hitting over .300 on that list--yet all young stars based on ability/performance.

Say what? That's the most backwards way of interpreting that I've ever heard! Who implied what you said? Who said he wasn't good now? Go back and read the post...the little words are the big words...the 4 letter word that looks like "peak" is the key word to focus on. With that in mind, now go back and read it while thinking of what the word peak means. Now apply that comment. Would you want a player's development to peak at age 23 then be all downhill from there or be strong at 23 and continue to improve?? Would it worry you more to see him go through a rough patch now or if someone said we have seen the best from Moncada already and then if Moncada followed that downward trajectory (away from his peak) from here on out?

Typically if you have a contender at the deadline, they have plenty of stars already. For evey team looking to land an impact player, there is another looking for smaller pieces who could fill holes. Obviously there are mega stars who could be available and they would make a larger impact, but don't underestimate the impact that a few "upgrades" could make to an already contending team.

I think it would worry me more if a 23 year-old top prospect's game was at its peak at age 23. The guy's a star now with so many ways to improve.

No joke. I'd take the game part though...Swish had some baller years.

I felt the same way about Walker...he seems like a very "safe" pick--nothing really seems to stand out about him and normally with a 2nd round pick, you see a reason why he's a 2nd rounder. An OFer to boot--in a system who loaded with OF prospects. Just through there were better options on the board for US--shoot, I could see Pilkington picked there in the 2nd round--luckily he was still there in the 3rd. I did read somewhere that people believe Walker is one of the most likely to contribute to a MLB team this season....but there are a lot of ?? about that statement...

Figured they'd go college RHP.

Rd 5 predictions? I'm going with Zack Hess, RHP out of LSU.

I don't think Hahn built this team to lose as many games as possible. This is the bridge team--only it's not a suspension bridge over a river, it's more like a few small stepping stones that span a large lake. I think this team is the RESULT of trying to WIN as many games as possible in the future. We traded our present for a better shot at a better future--the cost is what we see now. Also...the on-field product we see right now is also a result of several years ago's scouting/player development failures. Talking about the team of people who drafted Engle, Thompson, Beck (all the draft picks who weren't as good as them ?) and supplemented with acquisitions of Tilson, Avi, Shields, Delmonico, Davidson, Leury, Rondon, Narvaez--these are all guys who we either went out to draft, received in trade, or went out to get. You don't waste draft picks on players who help you lose games. You also don't trade good players for players you believe will help you lose. You MAY be able to stretch a FA signing to fit your theory--but there aren't many players who fall into that category. The more realistic view was...our front office looked at this list 2 years ago and thought "holy $*%&" we're going to be awful in 2 years, it's time to rebuild. Truth be told, it's staggering on how many draft picks they have missed on--I can assure you, that's not intentional. But to be fair, we should remember the good prospects that were moved for "win now" seasons. Gio Gonzalez, Marcus Semien, Tatis Jr., Eduardo Escobar. The guys you see now (minus Giolito, Moncada, Lopez) were the best our 2014-2016 "future" had to offer before we traded Sale, Eaton, Quintana and crew. NOW...luckily we did that then so we can have at least some hope in the present day future.

Keep him. Yes he's older--but he's VERY consistent and seems to be getting better with age. Plus last time we kept a 1st basemen around who was on the "wrong side of 30," we got 4 more all-star seasons out of a guy named Paul Konerko.

I don't think the problem is Renteria--it's the fact that Moncada hasn't gotten his RH at bats figured out yet this year. He's a completely different hitter RHed--one that plays as a 6th guy in the lineup. He's hitting .154 vs LHP so it makes sense to bury that number into the lineup rather than to lead off with it. As soon as he starts putting up numbers RHed--I think you'll see him slot differently--maybe not leadoff but def a more important spot than 6th.

Ownership also might not have liked the details of a KW rebuild. I think what ultimately sold them on RH's plan was the timing of it and how all sorts of details came together around the league to create the perfect storm for the Sox. Had they set out down that path 2 years ago, it wouldn't have been nearly as productive in my opinion. The fact that it came at a time when the conteding teams were also the large market teams who also had the top farm systems--at a time where we held the most valuable positional assets on several players in high-value/high-demand positions (SP, RP)--with very little competition from a weak FA class--not to mention very few other full-on rebuilding teams to contend with. It was a "fool-proof" as it gets from a timing perspective.

The swing mechanics were there last year, but this year he's really made the jump. Making consistently hard contact when he puts it in play. The guy just hit rockets all over the park.

Absolutely! Forces the pitcher to nibble--which will ultimately lead to more hitter's counts. He'll strike out a lot still--but he's swinging at strikes--that's a good sign for sure. And it sure didn't take long for him to get back into the zone coming off the DL. I would NOT want to pitch to him right now.

He's quickly turning in to must see TV for me. I do admit I watch his ab's and then work around the house for a bit--come back to see his next ab--repeat. Something about his swing is just fascinating. May be the beginning of a man crush.

I'm not saying they are silly or worthless--they certainly have the ability to give us some useful information, HOWEVER, THIS ABOVE is why I look at the new metrics with a raised brow. Sure...a number can be used to conclude Lopez as being bad and Shields as being great...but let's not lose site of reality--which factors in ALL numbers and gives you a REAL tangible/observable result--and a MUCH more accurate destination to an evaluation. Look at the pitcher, not the math--using real observation, you can see that Lopez is the better pitcher. I'm sure if you spend all night, you will find that there's a number out there that Adam Engel has on Mike Trout--but using that number to say that something like "Engle is the much better player because Trout has a higher average of balls in play that extends beyond what luck should yield and Engel's is bound to catch up and pass Trout's?" All because an "advanced number" comes out a whole point better than Trout? You can't lose site of reality and true human tuition when evaluating. Just ran the numbers...Jose Rondon's xFrTym came back at a -.00529 and that is .0057 higher than the RANx0-9 of Yoan Moncada. Factoring out the bad luck factor--he actually had a .00012 chance of not going 0-4 yesterday in Pitsburgh...meaning we should have waited 2 days to activate Moncada. Based on those numbers projected over the course of a season, Rondon is our best option at 2nd base over Yoan and it's not even close. Math will NEVER explain everything about a human being.