They also need 40 man room because they want to make a few signings, Yankees are another good spot to look to grab some pieces without giving up much. [Reply]
Teams are being told to plan on the three-batter minimum for pitchers being in effect in 2020. There was discussion at the owners' meetings to change it to a 2-batter minimum, but it was voted down, and pitchers will have to face at least 3 batters or finish the inning.
Originally Posted by DJJasonp:
Hmmmm....situational lefty brought in to get a lefty out.....gives up a dinger.
Does manager call for two intentional walks thereafter due to two tough righties coming up in the lineup?
What I think this means is that the situational lefty and situational righty are out of jobs from now on.
This is great news for left handed hitters. And great news for anyone who has been bored by the high strikeout numbers in late innings. Teams are going to have fewer opportunities to maximize reliever value. Relievers are going to have to be better at getting opposite-handed hitters out than in previous years. [Reply]
Originally Posted by duncan_idaho:
What I think this means is that the situational lefty and situational righty are out of jobs from now on.
This is great news for left handed hitters. And great news for anyone who has been bored by the high strikeout numbers in late innings. Teams are going to have fewer opportunities to maximize reliever value. Relievers are going to have to be better at getting opposite-handed hitters out than in previous years.
The guys who can pitch to both are going to have added value and a guy like Tim Hill should be traded right now as his value drops a ton with this. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Mecca:
The guys who can pitch to both are going to have added value and a guy like Tim Hill should be traded right now as his value drops a ton with this.
I know what I would do with him:
package him with Kennedy to the Padres for Myers and prospects.
I don’t know if they could pry The Arias kid away - he posted a strong OPS with strong SS defense - but that would be my first ask.
Myers, Edward Olivares, Anderson Espinoza and Buddy Reed would work for me. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Mecca:
It might be doable if you didn't make them take Kennedy's contract back and ate all of Myers deal.
They view Tatis and Abrams as their future MI.
I think a really interesting idea is to move Dozier.
Even without paying any of Kennedy’s deal, you’re clearing them of $50 million in contract on the swaps. And including a solid reliever with 4-5 years of cheap control.
That’s why I include Hill in the deal. Kennedy helps them this year, too.
Kennedy/Munoz/PomeranZ/Yates is an imposing back-end. [Reply]
Originally Posted by duncan_idaho:
Even without paying any of Kennedy’s deal, you’re clearing them of $50 million in contract on the swaps. And including a solid reliever with 4-5 years of cheap control.
That’s why I include Hill in the deal. Kennedy helps them this year, too.
Kennedy/Munoz/PomeranZ/Yates is an imposing back-end.
It's worth a shot the only issue is I doubt the Royals are going to be willing to do any of this shit when in reality it's what they should be doing.
Paying for prospects by taking on bad contracts while you suck isn't a horrible idea. But nah we're busy trying to keep the ghost of Alex Gordon. [Reply]
Originally Posted by duncan_idaho:
Even without paying any of Kennedy’s deal, you’re clearing them of $50 million in contract on the swaps. And including a solid reliever with 4-5 years of cheap control.
That’s why I include Hill in the deal. Kennedy helps them this year, too.
Kennedy/Munoz/PomeranZ/Yates is an imposing back-end.
Pads GM is said to be on the hot seat if they don't make a legit post-season push this year.
That deal helps them win games in 2020 and would also give them long-term payroll flexibility.
Or another SD malcontent.....What about taking The Faux-Hawk back? Maybe he’s happier here? Maybe they could eat 50 of the 100 left and we are at a 6/50 type of deal. Idk just tossing out ideas, don’t hate me [Reply]