chasfh

So, with four days off before the World Series starts, and therefore not in conflict with actual games, do we see any substantial moves by Scott Harris this week?

If the tapes truly are buckle-upable, the trick will be to influence independent voters by painting STS Republican candidates with the Trump brush from these recordings.

I wouldn't mind seeing Urshela in a Tigers uniform for a year or maybe two, although I would think there would be an even greater market for his services than for Jeimer's, and that would require outbidding other teams and might even involve multiple years.

Respectfully, I think this organization has rolled the dice way too much in the last several years, which is exactly what planning to play Schoop at a position he's manned for exactly one inning in the past eight seasons would be doing. I think that's why Baby Doc hired Harris: he's gotten sick of his front office rolling dice and crapping out. Particularly at third base!

I agree so long as the discussion goes like "I wonder how Scott Harris is going to approach the roster, maybe he will do X or Y", versus "I don't know what Scott Harris will do, no use speculating about it until we find out for sure", which is kind of where concluding "it's up to the team to figure out whether he can be fixed" leaves it.

In defense of mtutiger’s point, a move to bring on Longoria would not be a build-for-the-future move any more than keeping Candelario around for another year will build for the future. Either of them are placeholders for the guy we’re all besotted with at the moment, Keith Colt (or Colt Keith or Colt Colt or Keith Keith or whatever his name is). He’s the third baseman everyone is in love with for 2024 and beyond, so anyone else is a placeholder in the meantime, or at least until Colt plays himself out of our hearts. The $64 question is, can we fix Jeimer enough to give us two or three wins next year and then see what we want to do with him for the year after that? Or do we throw fungible-3B-of-the-day out there for six months while we wait around for Colt?

I think it is fair to stipulate that everything is conditional, nothing’s a guarantee, and we have no idea what Scott Harris will do, so I don’t think that should stifle our speculation, which IMHO is the funnest part of an offseason thread.

I definitely would not take a year of Evan Longoria over Jeimer, so agree to disagree on that one.

This comment just flashed back to me and I have to ask, why would we have to slip Papierski and Palacios through waivers just to, I assume, stash them in our system as depth? They both have rookie status intact through 2023, so what obligations do we have to them and their career now that their passing through waivers will relieve us of? This is an honest question as I suspect there are transactional niceties involved here that I don’t understand.

I think a good argument is that there’s probably nobody even close to Candelario who is reasonably available to us next year, unless we want to pay 4x his projected arb to lure Arenado here, which I promise ain’t happening. Granted, my assumption is that 2021 is closer to Jeimer’s true level than 2022. But even if he were guaranteed next year to split the difference between the two exactly in the middle, he would be a slam dunk to bring back at $7 million.

He was an average to even plus defender before this year, if you believe OA, anyway. He’s never going to be coached up to Nolan Arenado, but are we sure his defense has fallen off the cliff permanently as well? I wonder how much the hitting woes he wasn’t getting any help for affected the rest of his game, which is a thing. Would it better to completely punt on offense to get Kreidler’s glove in there for 140 games? FWIW, I doubt Harris will be willing to throw that against the wall.

Of course. That was always going to be the condition. The discussion at hand among us sitting out here in nobodyland is, do we think he’s fixable, or do we think his career is over? I’m in Camp Fixable. How about you?

Also, if all you want is to match 2022 at 3B, might as well bring back Jeimer, because he is probably 90+% likely to exceed that. And if the counter is yeah but it’s $7 million versus $750,000, I would say, I really doubt $6.25 million is a crippling difference to Baby Doc.

I think if we cut him, he’s gone, because there are at minimum half a dozen other teams that would be quite happy to bring Jeimer on for some substantial fraction of $7 million. This isn’t Drew Hutchison we’re talking about—this is someone who’s actually valuable to lots of other teams.

Would you pay $7 million for this? AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB HBP SO SB CS AVG OBP SLG OPS 512 69 131 33 4 17 63 58 6 126 1 1 .256 .338 .436 .774

This is the fifth straight ALCS the Yankees have lost. The last two before tonight’s were by A. J. Hinch.

It’s a journalistic best practice that they follow 100% of the time, regardless of the entity involved. If they call it a war crime before it’s officially determined to be, they veer into the subjectivity of determining who they choose to call it a war crime for and who they don’t. “But you called what Russia is doing a war crime, why aren’t you calling what this one African country is doing a war crime?” It leads to too much discussion they don’t want to have. Much more efficient to follow the rule all the time regardless and put up with online criticism about pulling punches versus serious, potentially actionable accusations of bias.

Nerd Alert: In defense of their use of the word “potential”, and only that: it’s a war crime only when it’s been determined as such by the International Criminal Court, and not when the paper simply publishes an article based on unvetted source testimony. Until the ICC rules on it, the media have to use the word “potential”. It’s a legitimate libel issue.

He did a pretty poor job of mocking her. He clearly wasn’t ready to hear that.

You will like this thread.

This is true if you believe, as you and many here apparently do, that Jeimer Candelario has suddenly become no better than a fungible, freely-available replacement-level player—or even, as someone else suggested, a worse option than eeny-meeny-miney-moeing a pick off the Rule 5 pile. I don't agree either of those is the case as of yet. I happen to think there is a really good chance that Jeimer is the best 3B option reasonably available to us for 2023, and as of this moment, I would hate to let him go for nothing.

I'm not worried about crossing that bridge until next winter. I'd like to see whether we can get him fixed and contributing for next year before we have to worry about a good problem to have like do we sign him for 2024 which, really, we have no idea what the rest of the team around him even looks like until then.

Same coaches who perhaps are fine enough to have around when a player is going good and doesn't need help, but are clueless to step in once they start going bad.

Is health merely luck? Asking for another team ...

Sure they were, but then, they're competitive for three games every year.