You are viewing the chat in desktop mode. Click here to switch to mobile view.
X
Chat With MLBTR's Steve Adams: 2/5/19
powered byJotCast
Prev Page View Full Chat
Steve Adams
4:37
I'm guessing you haven't paid much attention to the Dodgers' constant roster churn the past several years. Giants hired their GM as the new president of baseball ops. Get ready for a lot more of it.
4:38
The basic idea is simple enough: "This guy would be a nice depth piece if we can get him through waivers. Let's claim him and try to run him through waivers ourselves."
Twins Core
4:39
Thad Levine of the Twins has stated he'd rather operate from a perspective big free agent signings are best when a team is already projected to win a division to put a boot on a throat rather than when the team has needs to fill. Is this even a realistic? Are teams with obvious roster holes to fill with top free agents generally going to be projected to be division winners?
Steve Adams
4:41
That's part of the reason those comments seemed ridiculous. The other was that in the same interview, Derek Falvey sat there preaching how deeply the Twins believe in their core. Which is it? If you think Buxton is a 5-win player waiting to happen and Sano is a 3-win, 30-homer slugger -- that, to me, would be "believing" in the core -- then why not act now?

Beyond that, waiting a full season to see if Sano/Buxton can develop would make more sense if they had 5+ years of control remaining. Buxton will have 3 years of club control next winter. Sano will have 2. It's not like these guys are super controllable anymore. And, a year from now, the White Sox will be better, as will the Royals/Tigers.
4:42
With their payroll flexibility and farm depth, there's no reason they couldn't do something drastic like sign Machado, move Sano to 1B (Cron to bench) and then, next season, if Buxton or Sano flops, adjust the following winter. Machado would still be 27, and the payroll would still be wide open.
Their offseason confounds me, as does the narrative that being aggressive now and seeing if the current core reaches its ceiling is framed as an either/or proposition.
Houzer
4:42
Tigers need to trade for Joc Pederson. Would it take more than 2 low A prospects?
Steve Adams
4:43
I doubt the Detroit front office thinks it needs to give up long-term value for a player with two years of control remaining.
Nolan
4:44
Are the Rockies going to sign nolan to an extension? If so, will that drastically change how free agency markets have been working?
Steve Adams
4:47
Monfort seemed to indicate optimism over the weekend, but I really don't know how they'd be able to do it without shattering an AAV precedent or signing him into his late 30s on a deal that tops Stanton. Not sure either is viewed as ideal by the front office, but it's ultimately going to be Monfort's call. I don't think it'd have a profound impact on free agency, considering teams are already reluctant to go near the current high-water marks that are in place.
4:48
Oh, and Monfort = Rockies owner Dick Monfort. Sorry -- trying to get in the habit of spelling that out more clearly. I know not everyone knows every owner/GM/president of bb ops by name only
Rob
4:49
Is there 1 team that upsets the players (or other teams) more than others for their lack of spending?
Steve Adams
4:50
The MLBPA filed a grievance against the Pirates, Marlins, A's and Rays last year, asserting that the teams didn't appropriately utilize their revenue sharing funds to better the on-field product.

To the best of my recollection, though, the language in the CBA necessitating that they do so is a bit nebulous -- such that it can be interpreted that improving facilities, analytics staffs, etc. is all a means of improving the on-field product as opposed to just signing players.
Dalton
4:51
Thoughts on an evenly weighted draft lottery to take away the incentives of losing? Say, all non-playoff teams have one name in the hat, per se?
Steve Adams
4:53
I had one agent suggest to me recently that the first overall pick should go to the non-playoff team with the best record and descend from there. So basically, the best non-playoff clubs get top bidding in the first round, while the game's worst record would pick 20th. Then the playoff teams. Then starting in round 2, order would be determined by worst overall record to best.

I kind of like that as a means of incentivizing teams to try. There'd need to be similar adjustments made to the manner in which international funds are allotted, but it's a decent idea.
Pissed off MLBTR “fan”
4:53
Been on here for over an hour, no reply.
Steve Adams
4:53
1,954 people in the chat.
(At this moment. It's in a constant state of flux obviously)
Why not Marwin?
4:54
If dodgers are not going to be able to get JTR why not add Gonzalez as a RHB who can okay basically anywhere?
Steve Adams
4:55
When we were talking free-agent landing spots, Jeff Todd had one of my favorite lines of that day's discussion:

"The Dodgers grow Marwin Gonzalez-es on trees. No way they pay $12MM+ annually for him."

Hard to argue. Taylor, Muncy -- seems they're always unearthing versatile guys who can hit.
Ok I have to wrap this up for the week. Jeff will chat Thursday at 2pm CT. I'm on Twitter @Adams_Steve.

Thanks for chatting everyone!
Connecting…