122 replies to this topic

[BSLSteveBirrer]

Yeah per game. So about 16 plate appearances over the course of a season per spot?

So then the difference between batting leadoff and 3rd would be 32 at bats over the course of a season. And really more like 28 since hardly anybody plays 160 games.

 

So it would be interesting to see how this would really work out talking about Henderson.

Batting leadoff he would get 28 more at bats leading off vs hitting 3rd. But the flip side is that 140 of his at bats leading off are never going to have runners on base. How many times hitting 3rd in those same 140 at bats would he have runners on base? 

 

I get the more at bats thing but does 28 more at bats give him more RBI potential than 140 at bats with 0 potential to knock in runners beyond himself (leadoff solo HR)? I am sure the analytics guys have this data. Interesting to see as I don't think the extra at bats potential produces as much as the loss of potential to produce in the first inning?

[TwentyThirtyFive]

They could roll back with what they have and contend.  But they'll add, and they'll be better. 

This is how I see it.  You have to go play the games but I like enough of the talent in house to be an 75-80 win team on paper. As you said, they will add as well. I have no doubts about that

[Mackus]

They could contend if the make zero additions, but that shouldn't be the 50th percentile expectation.  I think they need to add to get the expectation above 500 and add a lot to really feel like a playoff contender as the season begins.

 

The good news is they could reasonably upgrade basically everywhere except catcher, wherever Gunnar plays, CF, and closer and they have a reasonably passabe option to fill all the other spots except for the rotation.  So don't need to be specific about how you add.  Any combo can work.  Just get the most and best guys you can.  Trade, FA, I don't care.  One SP is the only mandatory item on the shopping list.

[BSLSteveBirrer]

See I dont see us having huge holes to fill. Even if we have to go completely in house for '23 I think we are competitive. 

Competitive meaning what? A team that flirts with the back end of a wild card? I think we do have some big holes that need filling. Perhaps we have enough coming up with Westburg and Norby and GRod? Not good enough for me to rely on that. And there is no reason to do so. We have watched the team suffer for 5 years and have been told repeatedly that the FO would make moves when the time was right. The time is right this offseason to make moves. Also remember other teams aren't just sitting still either. They are making moves to improve as well.

 

Spend this winter. Be smart about it but spend on at least a TOR starter and a big bat. They can easily afford it. Easily.

[Mackus]

This is how I see it.  You have to go play the games but I like enough of the talent in house to be an 75-80 win team on paper.

 

 

They could contend if the make zero additions, but that shouldn't be the 50th percentile expectation.  I think they need to add to get the expectation above 500 and add a lot to really feel like a playoff contender as the season begins.

 

OK, sounds like we're pretty close to agreement on that then.

[TwentyThirtyFive]

They could contend if the make zero additions, but that shouldn't be the 50th percentile expectation.  I think they need to add to get the expectation above 500 and add a lot to really feel like a playoff contender as the season begins.

 

The good news is they could reasonably upgrade basically everywhere except catcher, wherever Gunnar plays, CF, and closer and they have a reasonably passabe option to fill all the other spots except for the rotation.  So don't need to be specific about how you add.  Any combo can work.  Just get the most and best guys you can.  Trade, FA, I don't care.  One SP is the only mandatory item on the shopping list.

They need to add quality. A few quality additions and Im feeling good. Agreed they have flexibility. 

[TwentyThirtyFive]

OK, sounds like we're pretty close to agreement on that then.

75-80 but with more upside than downside. I want to make that distinction. Its a young mans game and we have young guys on the cusp. Our vets like Hays, Mountcastle, Satander, Means, Tate etc still are in their mid to late 20s and their primes. Regression possible, but being who they are or squeezing a bit more out of them is going to be expected. Its a supporting cast that is good enough to be a contender

[You Play to Win the Game]

Maybe I’m alone, but I believe in the pitching program here. I don’t think it’s a fluke. Too many success stories up and down the pitching staff, and an intentionality about pitch usage, spin rates and analytics. Not that I’m against upgrading the arms, but I believe in the program in place as it relates to the pitching.

[Mackus]

They need to add quality. A few quality additions and Im feeling good. Agreed they have flexibility. 

 

Yeah, if you add three 3-4 WAR guys, I'm really excited for next year. Or one 5+ guy and two just solid players in the 2-3 WAR range.

 

I think I'd go one stud hitter, one stud pitcher, and one mid-rotation pitcher.  Maybe add a decent RP (not a closer) if I can get greedy.

 

 

I've been thinking SS because those are the stud hitters in their prime.  But you could grab two older guys for shorter term contracts.  Would Abreu and Brantley be too risky?

[TwentyThirtyFive]

Maybe I’m alone, but I believe in the pitching program here. I don’t think it’s a fluke. Too many success stories up and down the pitching staff, and an intentionality about pitch usage, spin rates and analytics. Not that I’m against upgrading the arms, but I believe in the program in place as it relates to the pitching.

And the prospects brought in by Elias and ran through this player development program are also having success in the show. Even though its just two guys right now. I guess you can say Stowers hasnt had success but he obviously needs more time. Some guys will still flame out. Not every guy will hit. Have to be encouraged by the progress a lot of the minor league bats made this year. Norby and Cowser moving 3 levels. Westburg and Ortiz having good years. The college bats drafted this year moving quickly and hitting the ground running. 

[Mackus]

The SS path:

 

IF: Rutschman, Mountcastle, Turner (FA moved to 2B), Henderson, Mateo

OF: Hays, Mullins, Stowers

DH: Santander

Bench: Urias, McKenna, backup C, corner IF/OF bopper

 

If Mateo flops you can slide Hederson/Turner to SS and play Urias until you can call up Westburg/Norby.  Cowser can replace Hays/Stowers by midseason if they stink, but the corner OF is the weak big question to begin the year.

 

The aging hitters path:

 

IF: Rutschman, Mountcastle, Urias, Henderson, Mateo

OF: Brantley, Mullins, Santander/Stowers

DH: Abreu

Bench: Stowers, McKenna, backup C, util IF

 

If Mateo flops, Henderson slides to SS and Westburg/Norby come up.

[TwentyThirtyFive]

Yeah, if you add three 3-4 WAR guys, I'm really excited for next year. Or one 5+ guy and two just solid players in the 2-3 WAR range.

 

I think I'd go one stud hitter, one stud pitcher, and one mid-rotation pitcher.  Maybe add a decent RP (not a closer) if I can get greedy.

 

 

I've been thinking SS because those are the stud hitters in their prime.  But you could grab two older guys for shorter term contracts.  Would Abreu and Brantley be too risky?

Brantley is a name Ive mentioned. Like his profile despite being 37. Would be good with Abreu. Would also be good with Rizzo if he opts out. Either really help at 1b. Brantley probably plays DH mostly moving Santander back into RF. Not ideal but I think it still works. THen you can platoon Stowers and Hays. Or just go with one of them if they earn it. In this scenario you add a very  good rotation arm as well and  go with Mateo, Gunnar, and Westburg/Ortiz/Norby at SS,3b,2b. 

 

 

Hopefully you could package Mountcastle and others for either another mid rotation arm or a BP piece. 

 

 

 

It does sound like the Os want another legit C to share with Adley. So thinking they will go after someone like Narvaez

[Mackus]

In this scenario you add a very  good rotation arm as well

 

That's every scenario   

 

Mandatory, IMO.

[BobPhelan]

The SS path:

IF: Rutschman, Mountcastle, Turner (FA moved to 2B), Henderson, Mateo
OF: Hays, Mullins, Stowers
DH: Santander
Bench: Urias, McKenna, backup C, corner IF/OF bopper

If Mateo flops you can slide Hederson/Turner to SS and play Urias until you can call up Westburg/Norby. Cowser can replace Hays/Stowers by midseason if they stink, but the corner OF is the weak big question to begin the year.

The aging hitters path:

IF: Rutschman, Mountcastle, Urias, Henderson, Mateo
OF: Brantley, Mullins, Santander/Stowers
DH: Abreu
Bench: Stowers, McKenna, backup C, util IF

If Mateo flops, Henderson slides to SS and Westburg/Norby come up.

Think I prefer the latter path now. Maybe not those exact names but the general idea.

[TwentyThirtyFive]

That's every scenario   

 

Mandatory, IMO.

IM good if they only upgrade on Lyles but it has to be a significant upgrade. I can live with filling out the rest of the rotation internally. Would prefer to add a 2nd solid arm but Im ok with just one if they are spending money on the offense instead.

[TwentyThirtyFive]

Think I prefer the latter path now. Maybe not those exact names but the general idea.

Again, being realistic about the Os and payroll I just think the 2nd path is more prudent. Look, Id love to add one of the top of the class hitters and then still be able to add a very good rotation piece, and a quality backup C, and a solid BP arm but its just not realistic. If you go out and spend big on one of the top bats youre just so reliant on that bat being great for 3-5 years. THey cant be mediocre. You wont have the money to maneuver much in the future.

[BSLChrisStoner]

Rodon and Swanson.  Thx. 

[Mike B]

Rodon and Swanson.  Thx. 

Sign me up for Rodon now.  I like Swanson, but do not think he gets out of Atlanta, but I said the same thing about Freeman, so who knows.

[JStruds]

I think I'd go one stud hitter, one stud pitcher, and one mid-rotation pitcher. Maybe add a decent RP (not a closer) if I can get greedy.

If you add that stud pitcher plus Rodriguez (and Means later), would moving Voth and Watkins to the BP fill this greedy thought?

[Mackus]

If you add that stud pitcher plus Rodriguez (and Means later), would moving Voth and Watkins to the BP fill this greedy thought?

 

No on Watkins, I don't really want him on the team.  Probably not on Voth either, but I think he profiles a little better as a potential RP option.  Wells would count.  Hall would probably count.  

 

I like the idea of FA#1, FA#2, Rodriguez, and then two of Bradish, Kremer, Wells, Hall in the rotation with the odd guys out in the bullpen (or perhaps Norfolk in Hall's case).  If you don't get two new SP, then those latter guys are covering 3 spots which could be fine or could be a big problem.  Means is back around the All-Star break plus or minus a month, so at that point he either fills a spot that's been floundering or he bumps someone out which is a good problem.

 

Bautisa, Tate, Perez are the arms you trust in the pen to begin the year, though is possible that any of them could flounder.

 

Krehbiel, Baker, Akin are the longmen or dubious late-inning guys who could be good or could stink.

 

Wells and Hall would be the guys I expect to also begin the year in the pen, and could be good or could struggle, but are closer to the top tier than the bottom tier, IMO.

 

Then you've got your AAAA/waiver wire guys like Voth, Reed, Vespi, Baumann, Zimmerman, Watkins that'll ride the shuttle up and down as needed.