hahahahahahahahaBig Amoco Sign wrote:I get what you're saying and I don't necessarily disagree but, they didn't move the needle much. We get a 0.5 to 1 WAR improvement with the roster as is. We had a chance to bolster the bench but there's not guarantee Robinson is better than Garcia and Munoz is a 0 WAR guy in 300 ABs and many innings. We won't have Matt Adams' or Voit's pinch hit ABs. We may see improvement over Fowler with Tyler O'Neill getting more playing time. But there's too many questions from all angles on RF to determine how much ground is gained.
Strictly speaking, in "gained ground," Goldschmidt could add as low as ~0.5 WAR with low variance. Again, the team was second in 1B WAR. Goldschmidt isn't even a lock to push us over what we got last year from the position (I assume he starts ~158 games).
Harper definitely pushes us into "okay now we're a lock for WS champs" territory. We're still in "may have to win Game 163" territory.
Michael Brantley
-
- Hall Of Famer
- Posts: 24006
- Joined: December 20 07, 2:45 pm
Re: Michael Brantley
-
- Hall Of Famer
- Posts: 24006
- Joined: December 20 07, 2:45 pm
Re: Michael Brantley
1. The Goldy move is not an "all in" move. Trading top prospects like Gorman for someone that can help immediately would be an all in move.go birds wrote:the goldy move looks like a going all in type of move as of right now.
there was talk of adding brantley, which i wasn't a fan of, but looking at the deal...why wouldn't they have done that deal?
thats a perfect deal for a team pushing in all its chips.
Add brantley, fix your bullpen with a will smith addition and lets ride.
This isn't sour grapes on missing out on brantley, it's just that this front office seemingly has no direction.
Still plenty of time left, but history tells us that this is where we will be come spring training.
2. Spending on Brantley, who may not start over any current outfielder, is not a good use of free agent dollars.
3. Will Smith is not a free agent, so Mo can't magically force the Giants to trade him for Martinez.
4. The front office has a direction. It's putting more weight on 2019 than they typically would in the past, but still not compromising future seasons.
- go birds
- -go birds
- Posts: 31896
- Joined: February 5 10, 9:54 am
Re: Michael Brantley
would love to see what 85 win team youd put togetherdmarx114 wrote:1. The Goldy move is not an "all in" move. Trading top prospects like Gorman for someone that can help immediately would be an all in move.go birds wrote:the goldy move looks like a going all in type of move as of right now.
there was talk of adding brantley, which i wasn't a fan of, but looking at the deal...why wouldn't they have done that deal?
thats a perfect deal for a team pushing in all its chips.
Add brantley, fix your bullpen with a will smith addition and lets ride.
This isn't sour grapes on missing out on brantley, it's just that this front office seemingly has no direction.
Still plenty of time left, but history tells us that this is where we will be come spring training.
2. Spending on Brantley, who may not start over any current outfielder, is not a good use of free agent dollars.
3. Will Smith is not a free agent, so Mo can't magically force the Giants to trade him for Martinez.
4. The front office has a direction. It's putting more weight on 2019 than they typically would in the past, but still not compromising future seasons.
-
- Hall Of Famer
- Posts: 24006
- Joined: December 20 07, 2:45 pm
Re: Michael Brantley
Who do you have in mind?MrCrowesGarden wrote:Then, IMO, go find the best player on a tanking team on a short term deal and make another Goldy move. It's all the rage, apparently. That absolutely can be done. If 2019 is going to matter then let's really make it matter.Popeye_Card wrote:I wouldn't classify it as "all-in", but it is a move consistent with how the Cardinals are viewing 2019 - the last chance to compete with this core group, before making decisions on how the next core will be built.Tim wrote:Adding Goldy was going all in? They dealt 3 pieces that had no future in the organization.
What will the excuse be next year when we don’t sign Arenado or re-sign Goldy?
Factors at play:
* Goldschmidt, Ozuna, Mikolas, Wacha all set to be FA's.
* One more (option) year of Marp. One more year of Yadi. One more (option) year of Gyorko.
That's a good chunk of the productive players on the roster. After 2019 the team has to decide if they are going to extend some of these guys, or completely commit to a new core around DeJong, Reyes, Flaherty, Bader, O'Neill, etc. That's not an outstanding next core (yet), though this year will probably tell us a lot more about their future. That could mean a couple leaner years while the team figures out a new strategy if some of these guys don't pan out.
This is part of why Harper doesn't necessarily make sense for 2020 and beyond. You could argue that he becomes the nucleus of a new core. Or you could argue that his talents and salary could be completely wasted on an also-ran team during his remaining prime years if other guys don't pan out.
https://www.spotrac.com/mlb/free-agents/2020/
edit: looks like you advocated for MadBum, but the Giants aren't tanking. He could be available at the deadline though.
Last edited by dmarx114 on December 18 18, 3:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- pioneer98
- Hall Of Famer
- Posts: 22250
- Joined: July 15 08, 8:24 pm
- Location: High A Minors
Re: Michael Brantley
I'd kick the tires on Alex Wood, especially if the Reds are considering getting him.
- MrCrowesGarden
- 'Burb Boy
- Posts: 23631
- Joined: July 9 06, 11:33 am
- Location: Out of the Loop
Re: Michael Brantley
Asked and answered.
Goldschmidt is an extension of what they've done for the last several offseasons: make a marked improvement at one and only one position and hope for the best. We've improved at one position for one year. I wouldn't want to waste it.
Goldschmidt is an extension of what they've done for the last several offseasons: make a marked improvement at one and only one position and hope for the best. We've improved at one position for one year. I wouldn't want to waste it.
- pioneer98
- Hall Of Famer
- Posts: 22250
- Joined: July 15 08, 8:24 pm
- Location: High A Minors
Re: Michael Brantley
Robbie Ray has 2 years before he's a FA but he's another I'd look at, and the D-Backs are doing this rebuild thing.
-
- Hall Of Famer
- Posts: 24006
- Joined: December 20 07, 2:45 pm
Re: Michael Brantley
Was Mikolas an improvement last year?MrCrowesGarden wrote:Asked and answered.
Goldschmidt is an extension of what they've done for the last several offseasons: make a marked improvement at one and only one position and hope for the best. We've improved at one position for one year. I wouldn't want to waste it.
- MrCrowesGarden
- 'Burb Boy
- Posts: 23631
- Joined: July 9 06, 11:33 am
- Location: Out of the Loop
Re: Michael Brantley
I'm glad the gamble worked out. I'll say that.
-
- Hall Of Famer
- Posts: 24006
- Joined: December 20 07, 2:45 pm
Re: Michael Brantley
I guess the safe move was investing 9 figures in Darvish?MrCrowesGarden wrote:I'm glad the gamble worked out. I'll say that.