2020-21 Offseason Discussion

Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Gson

Situational Stopper
Joined
Mar 28, 2020
Messages
682
Reaction score
357
Points
63
Trevor Bauer has made it known.. he will consider all offers for this 2020 NL Cy Young winner.. including multi-year deals..

Where is that nut basher?...

Thoughts?
 

Huber.

Adrninistrator
Joined
Feb 22, 2008
Messages
19,669
Reaction score
14,550
Points
123
Trevor Bauer has made it known.. he will consider all offers for this 2020 NL Cy Young winner.. including multi-year deals..

Where is that nut basher?...

Thoughts?
Where did he say that?
 

Gson

Situational Stopper
Joined
Mar 28, 2020
Messages
682
Reaction score
357
Points
63
Where did he say that?
His full statement:

"Again, I think it comes back to I just want a chance to win every year. I want to be in a situation where I feel valued and I have the chance to conduct my career the way I want to conduct it. So, pitch every fourth day, and stuff like that. I want to challenge myself and have a chance to do those things. So if there’s a situation where it presents itself where it is a four-year or five-year deal, and I feel confident that’s going to be a situation that’s good for me, I would consider it. I do think that in order to do the things that I want to do, I think I’m going to have to take on a little more risk than normal in those long-term contracts. …I’m not afraid of the one-year deals. I’m not afraid of the longer deals. It’s just going to be a case-by-case basis, and we’ll see what the situations look like"

This was in USA today.. w/ Bob Nightengale as the author..
 

CDAV45

Dingers!
Joined
Mar 11, 2020
Messages
478
Reaction score
355
Points
63
Well, considering I coach a college sport and recruit athletes extensively, I'd like to think I know a thing or two about athletic development. Maybe I don't, I dunno.

But what I do know is that I like not getting fired.

We bring in hot-shot freshmen all the time who we think can immediately upgrade over what we already have and, in a majority of instances, they just don't pan out. Or maybe it takes a few years for it to click for them. I've learned long ago that talent doesn't always = production the higher you go in sports. When it's your name on the door, the consistent and tried-and-true guys are like gold.

Conversely, we've given huge opportunities to freshmen and they've been successful. It's a balancing act.... you don't want to put a player in a position where they're not gonna have chance to be successful-- that could ruin the player for good. But you also want to give them enough rope to work thru things. Again, it's all about balance.

I would appreciate it if you didn't put words in my mouth. I've never mentioned Domingo Santana at all.... Naquin and Luplow are fairly proven commodities in their respective roles. I was literally saying that about Naquin in the post you replied to so I'm not sure where you're going with this Domingo Santana thing.

Look at Bobby Bradley. He raked at AAA Columbus (.912 OPS) and came up and struck out in 41% of his PA's and looked generally awful at the plate. Like, how is that good for his development? How is that good for the team? Sustained failure will ruin an athlete. If you're not ready, you're not ready. Guys like Urshela and Aguilar both had sustained failure here and the Indians were right in letting them go. Good on them for making the Indians look bad down the road.... but let's not try to re-write history.
Sorry, I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, but you can't have it both ways. Johnson has done nothing but perform and produce. His athleticism is rare. Our current OF talent is not rare, it's common or worse. I'd rather give Domingo another shot than Naquin or DeShields. He could perform worse than both, but he has the potential to do things they simply can't. They are average, run of the mill players at best which is why I was against acquiring DeShields from the get go. We already had Mercado, Zimmer, and Johnson who could all potentially be much better. You may like Naquin and DeShields because they consistently give you mediocrity or less, but I know that this team is facing competition in the division that won't allow them to "slide by" any longer. If they want to win then they better start putting some players that at least have the potential to produce well in as many positions as possible. Reyes and Naylor are good starts. We have Ramirez. We are losing Lindor and likely Hernandez. We didn't have a CFer that could do much of anything. Naquin was terrible and hasn't really been much since the first half of 2016. Not one of our 3 C could hit a barn standing inside of it. These are not the type of players that you hold someone like Johnson up for IMO. I don't mean any disrespect, but I can't disagree with your view more.

Numerous hall of famers and all-stars have struggled on their initial call ups. It's more common than not. Bobby Bradley had 45 AB at the age of 23. His SO numbers have always been high. He can't play anything other than 1B and DH and those were both covered by Santana and Reyes. If we got any production at all from our OF then I wouldn't be suggesting that Johnson be used at this time, but that's just not the case. An example is Urshela. You brought him up, I didn't. I didn't because he was given an ample opportunity and was surpassed by Ramirez. Again, that's not the case here. Aguilar was cut loose because we had f'n Nich Swisher blocking him. That's an example of a supreme Fup. You don't believe me, then look at Aguilar's career major and minor league numbers. I posted them earlier.

I also find your argument odd in the fact that you're ok with guys "that have been there" performing poorly, but God forbid a young, talented player come up and not light the world on fire immediately. If you're a college coach then you already know that the amount of patience a player is allotted is in direct correlation with that player's potential. You also know that occasionally a freshman outperforms your upper classmen.

Look, I love CA and MC. I have a genuine respect for what they do and how they do it. My guess is that they also feel that some changes need to be made because they are not going to remain competitive with one of the league's worst offenses that stands to lose the likes of Lindor and Hernandez. Please understand that I'm fully aware of the risk involved. Where we differ is that I am more willing to put my stock into the younger, more talented, but less experienced players. My gut tells me the Indians FO is about to do the same.
 

CDAV45

Dingers!
Joined
Mar 11, 2020
Messages
478
Reaction score
355
Points
63
If he looked ready they wouldn't have sent him down to be honest. He's okay in CF, he can play there, but that will not be his main position.

I am okay with the winner for LF and 1B. I think Bauers, Naylor etc will be a nice competition.
I hope that you're right about Bauers. I would love to see him succeed. He is the type I'm willing to live and die by. Having said that let's have a comparison. Player A has 7 minor league seasons under his belt and has slashed 275/361/414/775 and player B has 4 minor league seasons under his belt and has slashed 284/344/460/804. Both are 25 yrs old and player B is a better defender. Which do you trust more and which do you go with? What if you can go with both because there isn't really anyone blocking them?
 

xmasbuck

Situational Stopper
Joined
Jul 20, 2020
Messages
803
Reaction score
341
Points
63
His full statement:

"Again, I think it comes back to I just want a chance to win every year. I want to be in a situation where I feel valued and I have the chance to conduct my career the way I want to conduct it. So, pitch every fourth day, and stuff like that. I want to challenge myself and have a chance to do those things. So if there’s a situation where it presents itself where it is a four-year or five-year deal, and I feel confident that’s going to be a situation that’s good for me, I would consider it. I do think that in order to do the things that I want to do, I think I’m going to have to take on a little more risk than normal in those long-term contracts. …I’m not afraid of the one-year deals. I’m not afraid of the longer deals. It’s just going to be a case-by-case basis, and we’ll see what the situations look like"

This was in USA today.. w/ Bob Nightengale as the author..
also said that cincinnati was his favorite place to play - that Reds pitching coach Derek Johnson was the best pitching coach he's worked with - finally, that he wants to pitch every four days wherever he signs

interesting that he pitched so well this season despite not throwing to the greatest catcher in the history of the universe (some of these perez posts are getting real close to fanboy stuff)
 

Beanie4Heisman

Sexton On The Beach
Joined
Aug 31, 2008
Messages
447
Reaction score
348
Points
63
Re: Bauer

I'd actually like to see him stay with the Reds going forward. Seems they've got a good thing going down there with the current pitching coach along with those young arms they are bringing up. Would enjoy being able to catch him pitch abt once a week on Fox Sports just as an Ohioan.

Despise his personality or not, his enthusiasm for the game is unmatched. He has an interesting approach to pitching and attacking hitters. The dude is obviously a weapon when at full health.
 

Beanie4Heisman

Sexton On The Beach
Joined
Aug 31, 2008
Messages
447
Reaction score
348
Points
63
Hear me out...

Indians go full on financial shewdness for one season. Cut Hand, Santana, trade Frankie etc. As much as I'd hate to see Hernandez go, many around here seem to think that is a done deal too. So he is out for the point of this discussion also.

Given the choice between bringing back him and Brad Hand I'd lean towards keeping Cesar and Jose on the infield solely for some sense of veteran stability and obvious offensive consistent production and ability to simply be on base one or two times most nights.

But I digress.

What if we were to go giant youth movement and finally figure out what kind of cards we are holding with these kids.

I'll drop such a lineup as simply a begining discussion point. {Without theorizing what a trade for Francisco Lindor may or may not return}
This lineup leans greatly towards youthful bats with power potential. I truly think we'd do well over the next handful of years if they were given a genuine chance to sink or swim until around the All Star Break to determine what we may have and proceed accordingly.

1B Bradley/Jones
2B Freeman
SS Miller
3B Ramirez
C Perez/Hedges
RF Naquin/Mercado
CF Johnson/Zimmer
LF Naylor/Luplow
DH Reyes
 

EdMonix11

All-Star
Joined
Jun 2, 2012
Messages
4,856
Reaction score
5,238
Points
113
Sorry, I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, but you can't have it both ways. Johnson has done nothing but perform and produce. His athleticism is rare. Our current OF talent is not rare, it's common or worse. I'd rather give Domingo another shot than Naquin or DeShields. He could perform worse than both, but he has the potential to do things they simply can't. They are average, run of the mill players at best which is why I was against acquiring DeShields from the get go. We already had Mercado, Zimmer, and Johnson who could all potentially be much better. You may like Naquin and DeShields because they consistently give you mediocrity or less, but I know that this team is facing competition in the division that won't allow them to "slide by" any longer. If they want to win then they better start putting some players that at least have the potential to produce well in as many positions as possible. Reyes and Naylor are good starts. We have Ramirez. We are losing Lindor and likely Hernandez. We didn't have a CFer that could do much of anything. Naquin was terrible and hasn't really been much since the first half of 2016. Not one of our 3 C could hit a barn standing inside of it. These are not the type of players that you hold someone like Johnson up for IMO. I don't mean any disrespect, but I can't disagree with your view more.

Numerous hall of famers and all-stars have struggled on their initial call ups. It's more common than not. Bobby Bradley had 45 AB at the age of 23. His SO numbers have always been high. He can't play anything other than 1B and DH and those were both covered by Santana and Reyes. If we got any production at all from our OF then I wouldn't be suggesting that Johnson be used at this time, but that's just not the case. An example is Urshela. You brought him up, I didn't. I didn't because he was given an ample opportunity and was surpassed by Ramirez. Again, that's not the case here. Aguilar was cut loose because we had f'n Nich Swisher blocking him. That's an example of a supreme Fup. You don't believe me, then look at Aguilar's career major and minor league numbers. I posted them earlier.

I also find your argument odd in the fact that you're ok with guys "that have been there" performing poorly, but God forbid a young, talented player come up and not light the world on fire immediately. If you're a college coach then you already know that the amount of patience a player is allotted is in direct correlation with that player's potential. You also know that occasionally a freshman outperforms your upper classmen.

Look, I love CA and MC. I have a genuine respect for what they do and how they do it. My guess is that they also feel that some changes need to be made because they are not going to remain competitive with one of the league's worst offenses that stands to lose the likes of Lindor and Hernandez. Please understand that I'm fully aware of the risk involved. Where we differ is that I am more willing to put my stock into the younger, more talented, but less experienced players. My gut tells me the Indians FO is about to do the same.
Well, I think your assumption that Daniel Johnson would be better than Naquin is just plain wrong. Johnson and DeShields don't play the same position so there isn't a comparison to be made-- FWIW, I wish they did play the same position but it's clear the Indians think DeShields is a glove-first, plus defending CFer and don't care as much about the bat at that position. Johnson not being an average or better defender in CF and not likely to hit lefties means he's a corner OF in this organization.

Further, Naquin had a career .793 OPS going into this season. That makes him a 2nd tier, middle of the pack, everyday RF. His career averages would've ranked him 12th amongst qualified RF this season in the MLB-- in the mix with guys like Nick Castellanos, Mark Canha, Charlie Blackmon, Whit Merrifield and Max Kepler. So what on EARTH are you talking about when you're calling him terrible and mediocre? Yeah, he had a bad year and didn't live up to his career averages but there's a pretty solid track record there that you seem to be ignoring or discounting for some odd reason.

We're just gonna have to agree to disagree on this because you're making it seem like the Indians are keeping Mike Trout in minors with regards to Daniel Johnson and I'm fairly certain that isn't the case. Sorry I see the value in a solid veteran player....

I also love the assumptions you're making about my philosophies on baseball and my thoughts on young and old players. You must be new around here.... I was the only one beating the drum for Jose Ramirez to keep his roster spot on the big club a few years ago when he was a struggling nobody and I took a beating for it.
 

sportscoach

Snarly's Gaming Rival!!
Joined
Dec 8, 2016
Messages
6,156
Reaction score
2,308
Points
113
I hope that you're right about Bauers. I would love to see him succeed. He is the type I'm willing to live and die by. Having said that let's have a comparison. Player A has 7 minor league seasons under his belt and has slashed 275/361/414/775 and player B has 4 minor league seasons under his belt and has slashed 284/344/460/804. Both are 25 yrs old and player B is a better defender. Which do you trust more and which do you go with? What if you can go with both because there isn't really anyone blocking them?
I am an OBP before SLG, so essentially the difference between A and B is the fact A has a much better plate discipline, but has less gap/raw power while player B has better power and less plate discipline. A is usually a more consistent hitter, while be is streaky, but can have greater numbers. So what do you prefer?
 

DerekG123

Rookie
Joined
Jun 1, 2020
Messages
56
Reaction score
57
Points
18
Can't understand why Naquin is even being considered as a potential factor anymore. His current career OPS of. 766 is literally being carried by two extremely hot months in 2016 and one in 2019. These are called outliers. In 5 years you got 3 months where you look like superman and the rest just blah. Then when he is struggling to make contact in the other months he doesn't draw walks. Then of course as we know he is always hurt.

So he isn't reliable at the plate (a few extreme highs with mostly lows) and he isn't reliable in health/availability. And that's all he will ever be. Not sure what else we need to see here.
 
Joined
Oct 3, 2019
Messages
1,278
Reaction score
1,978
Points
113
1B Bradley/Jones
2B Freeman
SS Miller
3B Ramirez
C Perez/Hedges
RF Naquin/Mercado
CF Johnson/Zimmer
LF Naylor/Luplow
DH Reyes
This is likely to happen, or something very similar.

I saw a report from the Arizona Instructs that said Nolan Jones in playing left and right field in the three games they've played so far. I doubt they try to train him to play both first base and the outfield at the same time, so maybe the decision has been made to convert him to an outfielder. If that is the case I would switch Jones and Naylor in your lineup. Luplow would play every day until they think Jones is ready, then possibly platoon them in left assuming Luplow continues to struggle against RHP's.

I've pretty much given up on Zimmer unless he kills it at AAA this year and earns another shot, so I'd play Johnson in center every day. CDAV says he's an off-the-charts athlete. Maybe he turns into another Byron Buxton only without the injuries. I'm coming around to his argument that the Indians need to gamble on high ceiling guys and just make a commitment.

I think that thanks to the virus they have reached the point where they have to do that. They probably can't afford to keep signing guys like Cesar Hernandez, Rajai Davis, Austin Jackson, Edwin Encarnation, and Leonys Martin to patch a hole until the young guy is ready.

If you're talking about Tyler Freeman he has not played above high A and is 21 years old. He won't be our starting second baseman next year. They could give Chang a shot or sign a cheap veteran like Brad Miller.

The Indians have said they do not like to bring players up too early, have them fail, and then send them down. They strongly prefer to be patient, "finish off" their development, and then bring them up when they're ready to succeed in the majors. So I'm skeptical they will go north in April with guys that have not played any AAA like Freeman and Jones.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 3, 2019
Messages
1,278
Reaction score
1,978
Points
113
Where we differ is that I am more willing to put my stock into the younger, more talented, but less experienced players. My gut tells me the Indians FO is about to do the same.
I don't think they have a choice. They can no longer afford to patch holes with veterans unless they come extremely cheap.

Their philosophy has been to avoid tearing it down and starting over with a lineup of rookies to be force fed. They want to keep winning 90 games every year and avoid becoming the Pirates, so they've been signing guys like Hernandez and trading for Hand and Reyes. They've been trading for major league players like Clase, Naylor, and Quantrill. But those days may be over due to the financial hit they've taken. They may have no choice but to go with a lineup that includes players like Bradley, Johnson, Miller, and Chang.
 

sportscoach

Snarly's Gaming Rival!!
Joined
Dec 8, 2016
Messages
6,156
Reaction score
2,308
Points
113
This is likely to happen, or something very similar.

I saw a report from the Arizona Instructs that said Nolan Jones in playing left and right field in the three games they've played so far. I doubt they try to train him to play both first base and the outfield at the same time, so maybe the decision has been made to convert him to an outfielder. If that is the case I would switch Jones and Naylor in your lineup. Luplow would play every day until they think Jones is ready, then possibly platoon them in left assuming Luplow continues to struggle against RHP's.

I've pretty much given up on Zimmer unless he kills it at AAA this year and earns another shot, so I'd play Johnson in center every day. CDAV says he's an off-the-charts athlete. Maybe he turns into another Byron Buxton only without the injuries. I'm coming around to his argument that the Indians need to gamble on high ceiling guys and just make a commitment.

I think that thanks to the virus they have reached the point where they have to do that. They probably can't afford to keep signing guys like Cesar Hernandez, Rajai Davis, Austin Jackson, Edwin Incarnation, and Leonys Martin to patch a hole until the young guy is ready.

If you're talking about Tyler Freeman he has not played above high A and is 21 years old. He won't be our starting second baseman next year. They could give Chang a shot or sign a cheap veteran like Brad Miller.

The Indians have said they do not like to bring players up too early, have them fail, and then send them down. They strongly prefer to be patient, "finish off" their development, and then bring them up when they're ready to succeed in the majors. So I'm skeptical they will go north in April with guys that have not played any AAA like Freeman and Jones.
Guys like Freeman aren't Rule 5 eligible so they are on the outside looking in to get a position, but guys like Jones, Clement, who are Rule 5, they will have a legit shot to make the roster.

Indians will have a chance to bring in veterans like they always do. So the veterans competing with the young guys and the best 25 out of camp should be the attitude in 21.
 

January Through March Server Costs

Total amount
$1,380.00
Goal
$1,000.00
Donation ends:
Top