Click here to read the transcript of today’s live baseball chat
Headlines
Navigation
MLBTR INFO
Connect
MLB Trade Rumors is not affiliated with Major League Baseball, MLB or MLB.com
hide arrows
scroll to top
By Mark Polishuk | at
Click here to read the transcript of today’s live baseball chat
MLB Trade Rumors is not affiliated with Major League Baseball, MLB or MLB.com
hide arrows
scroll to top
Mark P, the chat isn’t even over and news of your Tigers GM candidacy is already spreading like wild fire! I personally think you are a shoe-in but I know it’s a competetive landscape. Wish you all the best!
In response to the comment of Ben on the chat. I’m calling the Rays overtaking the Yankees in the AL East and winning the division in the last days of the season. It seems to me trading Montogomery away was a bad decision on Cashman’s part.
Why not move Ohtani and Adell to the Dodgers? Especially Ohtani who the Dodgers are one year away from being able to just sign away from the Angels for nothing but a draft pick.
The Dodgers would steal a lot of the fans because they are in the same market
Only for one year
You realize they can just extend him, right?
I do know that. I also know that they can sign him as a FA in one year and keep their prospects.
Trading for Ohtani only has 2023 in mind.
Jimthegreat- You really think every time Ohtani and possibly Adell do something great they want it to benefit the Dodgers in their own backyard? Use common sense.
Yeah I am pretty great aren’t I?
After 2023 Artie Moreno won’t have any say in that matter. At least not on Ohtani. Would he rather get prospects from the Dodgers for Ohtani or get nothing from the Dodgers for Ohtani?
Not really bro.
@MarkP, I think you are spot on regarding your bold prediction that diamondbacks get very close to the final wildcard spot. They look very impressive both pitching and hitting with their young players. I am a bit worried about Padres having to play them. Luckily it looks like brewers and Phillies are both playing so poorly, it might be one of those two teams that sweat the diamondbacks more.
Arizona is 10 games back from Philly. I don’t see that happening.
The Brewers haven’t been on their A-Game, but the Phillies are 10-8 since mid-August. I wouldn’t call that playing poorly. They would have to go at least 26-5 (an 83.9% WP) from here on out, assuming the Phillies don’t win another game. They could surpass the Brewers, but I don’t think the D-Backs are going to win 85% of their remaining games.
Is Gary Sheffield a HOFer? Check out his numbers and let me know
He just barely breaks the 60 WAR threshold, which is usually the baseline for most HOF level players. He also has 509 home runs, a 140 OPS+, and OPS over 900. His trophy case has five Silver Sluggers, a World Series ring, nine all-star jerseys, and a batting title. In terms of WAR, OPS and OPS+, he has similar numbers to Vlad Sr., Mike Piazza, and Duke Snider. I’ve always thought he’s a HOF caliber player, or at least borderline, but the voters don’t seem to agree.
Sheffield has the numbers but his character and being named in the Mitchell Report will keep him out.
The character clause is called so inconsistently. It’s always used in a sense to keep guys out of the HOF rather than as a reason to get a guy into the HOF. I’ve never heard someone say something like “You know, Curtis Gradnerson might not have the Hall Of Fame numbers, but he was an awesome teammate to everyone and a great guy off the field”. Not saying character shouldn’t matter, but if voters are going to use it as a reason to keep a guy out, then they should equally apply it to get a good guy in.
I believe the PED connection will keep him out. He is not Big Papi who just buttered up everyone with his big teddy bear personality and the BBWAA looked the other way. Sheffield will get the Clemens/Bonds/McGwire/Palmeiro/Sosa treatment.
In Ortiz’s defense, his positive test was much different than others from his era, same with Sosa. The YouTuber Foolish Baseball sumarized it best in his mock HOF Ballot video.
Ortiz and Schilling are prime examples of the HOF selection process being mostly subjective and biased.
@mlb1225 I agree with your point regarding the character clause. Quite frankly, so many sports writers over the years have their own personal biases, we all do. I have a huge problem with judgment calls like “character” being a reason to vote. It needs to be more clear cut than that. There should be a clear set of moral rules that if a player violates them, then they don’t get considered. Something more concrete when it comes to character specifically.
@mlb, nope, it’s not called the Hall of Good Guys…
not really.
without roids, schilling was a decent pitcher.
once he got on roids and winning teams full of juicers, guy flipped flopped on steroids.
was already clear in 2005 when he chose not to speak out about steroids he was a massive hypocrite, and his politics don’t matter in the slightest (shoot, smoltz is the guy most compared to him, is a republican and has been for decades, didn’t stop him from getting in first try. curt just doesn’t have the non roid numbers to back up his claim to hall of fame).
Then don’t use the character clause. You can’t have it one way or the other. You want to prevent a HOF-caliber guy from getting in because of the character clause? Okay, but you better give guys like Granderson more votes too. You can’t say “This guy doesn’t deserve it because character clause” and then turn around and say “Who cares if he was a good guy? He was a good player, but not a HOF player”.
sesnorship – lmbo. You state that Schilling is not in the HOF because of his connection to roids, and yet Ortiz is in the HOF when he also is linked to roids.
Thank you for proving my point.
Check out how dominant Albert Belle was when he played…Some his his #’s are off the charts.
One of the best I ever saw in person.
Imagine if he would have got in 4 or 5 more decent years. His stats would have measured up with some of the all-timers.
i did.
considering his numbers are more like just 10 years of play (since first few years were reduced seasons for him, cup of coffee, etc..), he was 3 prime years away from hall of fame, more like 5-6 years based on his 2000 season (which was still good, mind you, but a clear step down from his peak, and him playing on a bum hip for most of it).
The hip did him in. If he was voted in now I wouldn’t be against it. Veterans Committee one day perhaps. Just found out recently that most of the committee is former players and hall of famers. Sure like that better than the “sports writers.” Whatever that means..
You’re unclear what a sportswriter is? Seems pretty straightforward.
No I’m not even remotely unclear as to what a sports writer IS or ISN’T. I’ll rephrase in any case…I don’t think the WRITERS have any stinkin business voting players in the HOF.
I wouldn’t leave it to self-serving current HOFers, many of whom seem content to keep others out to maintain their status and exclusively of their club.
How so? The Veterans Committee elects players that are not eligible for conventional election by the writers anymore. If any group can be classified as gate-keepers it’s the sports writers.
The whole process is flawed. Lou Whitaker isn’t a Hall of Famer? Right.
Of course he is a HOF guy. And of course it is deeply flawed. As there is also Dave Parker, Albert Belle, Juan Pierre,Johny Damon, George Foster, and plenty of others.
Im confused by Mark including Detmers as one of the better rookie pitchers this year.. I dont think he even comes close in the conversation.. He should have been left down in AAA for one more year. Kirby is far and away better.
He didn’t say that Kirby is worse than Detmers, just one of the better ones which is certaintly true. 3.67 ERA, 4.05 FIP, 1.19 WHIP in 108 innings. Third best fWAR among rookie pitchers, behind Spencer Strider and Kirby, and tied with John Schreiber. Third best ERA and 4th best WHIP among rookie starters with 12+ starts, Kirby is certaintly better than Reid Detmers, but Detmers is still a top 3-5 rookie pitcher this year.
I thought I posted this earlier but I don’t see it here. One thing that has confused me is how SF is considered a major market, but Oakland is a small market when the stadiums are less than a half hour drive from each other.
I find it funny when someone calls it a small market and then the next person you see claims that OAK would never leave the Bay “Area” because the market is too large.