OT: Raise the Jolly Roger: Congrats to the Houston Cheaters on their win

[virtualseasontix]

Agreed with DJ…Varsho for Moreno + is good news for Buccos, if BR is actually moved…and I too think it’ll happen in the next week, given how much smoke there is and how fast things are moving. There was a lightly-sourced rumor today that Pirates are asking for Cortes from NYY. So I see a few scenarios I’d be for:

1) Volpe, Pereira, Warren/German/Gil + lotto
2) Cortes, Peraza, Pereira/Sweeney (similar 6-10), Beeter, + lotto

I don’t see Yankees giving both Volpe and Cortes in any deal, and frankly don’t think they’ll give Volpe and another org top 10, but wishful thinking above.

 

[SomeDude]

Its not 1955. There is zero reason to release bad press when everyone has a phone in their hand.

This is the Pittsburgh Pirates we're talking about. Not an actual real or smart organization.

 

[Empoleon8771]

To add on the Varsho-Reynolds discussion, I've seen a lot of people say Reynolds has a significant risk of not being viable defensively in CF, which I think is very valid. I think he'll likely be able to stick in CF in the short term, but players like him almost always end up in the corner outfield as they age. I think that is completely valid. The one thing I don't understand though is why Reynolds gets docked for his potential defensive regression risk going forward, but Varsho doesn't get docked for his potential offensive regression risk going forward.

Varsho is an above average hitter right now, he has a 107 OPS+ in the last 2 years. But that OPS+ is heavily driven by his power, because he's not a good hitter for average (.239 in the last 2 years) and he's not good at taking walks (50 walks per 600 PA). Reynolds has an OBP of .368 in the last 2 years, compared to .308 for Varsho. If Varsho's power decreases at all, he doesn't have any other tools at the plate to negate out those losses.

 

[DJ Spinoza]

That's a good point re: Varsho vs. Reynolds. I also think it's just the case that Reynolds is completely viable in CF for the next 2-3 years when he's cost controlled, so it's mostly a concern in a prospective extension scenario.

I like the idea of getting Gil as a third player in a Yankees deal. The other Yankee who I like a lot is Spencer Jones, but my guess is that the Yankees might not want to put him in a deal that is also headlined by the players who need to headline.

Just focusing on Volpe vs. Dominguez+Peraza, there are some different possibilities there. Volpe is so appealing because of the premium bat, and whether he's moving off shortstop isn't a huge concern since Cruz needs at minimum a full year in MLB to further establish himself or show that it might not be viable full-time. The other package would give us a plus-glove immediate option in the middle infield along with the top OF prospect that we won't have until we hopefully draft Crew 1.1. I think there's a lot to like with both approaches, and despite the fact that either option is the right value for Reynolds, I do think it's an open question whether Cashman will do it. He just hasn't paid the prospect cost in big deals at all.

I think it's probably the biggest longshot, but my preferred option is a deal centered on Kirby. It would actually be interesting because although it would be a colossal blow to your lineup, you'd get back an impact pitcher and your rotation might actually become more of a weapon. DiPoto is the most unpredictable of anyone still for my money, so while I see all the reasons he wouldn't do it, he's the GM I almost expect to get in the mix, as he's been quiet outside of the Hernandez trade.

I definitely like the abstract possibilities out there, but I don't want to stray too far away from the reality that this move is happening because the owner (and perhaps GM, it's hard to say) doesn't want to make a relatively modest and low-risk investment in Reynolds. A trade that returns Kirby+ would be a lot easier to stomach as a trade that reshuffles the deck of young talent, because even these premium headliners we're all throwing around are still unproven. Look at how people talked about Kelenic prior to debuting vs. now for just one obvious and cliche example. If Cherington could both pull off a trade for Kirby+ and then get Cruz signed to an extension before the season, I'd be swinging back over to the side of more positivity towards the front office.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Not Pirates related but this just came out:



People dunked on the GIants for backing out of the Correa deal, but it looks like there are legitimate concerns with Correa's right ankle.

In more Pirates related news:



This hurts the "Varsho has more value than Reynolds because Varsho will stick in CF" claim.

 

[Shrimper]

Pirates signed Rich Hill

As you were

 

[Josey Wales]

Pirates signed Rich Hill

As you were

The Pirates and left-hander Rich Hill are in agreement on a one-year, $8MM deal, reports Jeff Passan of ESPN. The deal is pending a physical.

 

[Empoleon8771]

The Pirates signing Hill is bizarre because Hill has been a good middle rotation starter for a very long time, but he's so old that I fundamentally don't understand why he wanted to come here.

He had a 4.27 ERA with a 3.92 FIP in 26 starts last year, which are both pretty solid numbers. Now consider that the 4.27 ERA was his worst ERA since 2013? Yeah, the dude can pitch. The only question I have is why he'd want to sign here to be a #3 starter over being a #5 starter for a contender, but he is a very good starter.

 

[DJ Spinoza]

Hard to complain much about adding an 8M pitcher as competent as Hill who really pushes guys like Wilson and Thompson away from the rotation (and Thompson still has 3 options left, so he'll definitely be ticketed as starter depth in AAA if that matters). I do have some scattered thoughts that are probably something like nitpicks:

1) Hill has never been the most durable pitcher, and innings stability is the biggest thing the rotation definitely needs IMO. If he can give you 160 (or the rough equivalent pace, assuming he's ticketed to be traded), that's perfectly workable, but there is a little bit of risk that he could be out of commission for a month or so early in the year.

2) Again with the one year deals, though obviously Hill is probably not getting 2-year deals anywhere. This is a bit of a separate issue, but I almost wonder if Reynolds' trade request threw a slight wrench into the plans. It's well within the realm of possibility that BC never intended to sign a multi-year guy, but the way things are shaping up right now has this season looking like a "let's improve while also having some veterans to trade off, our best player to sort out, and a lot of money coming off the books next winter".

3) I'm resigned to it, but a little bit worried/frustrated at how the rotation depth seems lined up to push Ortiz to AAA until Super Two clears for him. I'm sure there's an argument that with his lack of experience in the upper minors, the polish will be good for him, but based on stuff, he's a better option than Oviedo and certainly Velasquez, who it sounds like has a handshake deal to start here.

We'll see - I'm not too worried about depth questions because they have a way of working themselves out with pitchers. I do have to wonder if it wouldn't have been better to just take some combination of these moves and invest the money into a mid-rotation workhorse type guy over 4 years. The payroll space should be there, or we're just joking around.

I'm open to the argument about flexibility and at the end of the day I guess there's no getting around the reality that we're a back-to-back 100 loss team who is chasing 75 wins as a start. There's only so much excitement that is possible in an offseason... finding some way to get back to the table with Reynolds, or full and completely pivoting to get Cruz signed long-term are about the only things that can do it. Otherwise, I am looking forward to a team that will be more watchable on paper, knowing that it will be frustrating if guys like Endy and Ortiz are held down in AAA. Flexibility should also give you the option of rewarding prospects with MLB playing time, and I don't think there's a better use of a "meh 75 win" season than starting to get some experience for guys who have to be big contributors ASAP.

Final thing is that I am pretty curious if we'll make one more somewhat notable position player signing. The OF is crowded, but Cutch still seems easily doable on a 1-2 year deal. Maybe a guy like Pollock has some upside left and will be looking at one year offers.

 

[OnMyOwn]

Oldest player in baseball. That’s an interesting signing, but I’ve always liked how he throws and we need starters.

 

[DJ Spinoza]

Braves get another longer but not insanely long extension at a bargain price. No real comparison between Murphy and Reynolds beyond the years of control, but the Braves do manage to pull off these deals where the team control looms large to likely get a big discount. I think part of the generalized team collusion that happens is centered around this kind of thing. Maybe too quick to say, but I can't think of anyone in a similar boat as Reynolds who got the kind of extension that he's presumably seeking.

Every one I can think of either is for a much younger player and doesn't necessarily buy out their full FA years or it does buy them out at a much more modest price. In short, Reynolds at 6/85 or something like that is the "best" compromise possible under the current status quo. I don't want to retrace this old ground, but I am pretty curious if we'll ever get full reporting on what the offer actually was that ended negotiations. My sense is still that such a deal or similar is still a pretty good one from Reynolds' side... there's a fair bit of risk in not becoming a FA for 3 more years. If you assume that his 3 arb years are 30M, then 3/55M or so might be a conservative low bar for him, but if he has a bad injury or a couple mediocre power years, then it might not, especially if he doesn't run a high AVG/OBP consistently.

My gut feeling is still that the Pirates' last offer to him was in the ballpark of what I'm sketching out here, i.e., the relatively team friendly longer-term extension, but also included some kind of wrench that gave the Pirates more flexibility or advantage somehow. Something like this deal but with an additional team option for cheap tacked on, which might cut into the possibility of Reynolds nailing down another 30M+ on a final 2-3 year deal. I could be way off, but if it's just 6 years for 85-90M, then compromise reasons on both sides make that pretty viable. If you do something like add a 7th year at 12-15M or so, or the FA years aren't all guaranteed, then there's less reason for Reynolds to sign up.

One final scattered thought on this front is that Cherington doesn't really have any reason to be worried about the term for Reynolds. If he signs him for 8-9 years, he might not even be around in those final years, and so I think Reynolds ultimately has to be more of a Nutting thing. That said, given that Cherington's contract is up somewhat soon, I think it's in his interest to keep Reynolds around in order to guarantee as much improvement as possible in 2023. This might be a thing where ownership prerogative vs. GM in a bind really conflict and lead to a botched job on an important player, though this could also be a moot point if Cherington already has more or less a verbal agreement that he'll stay. He had full authority to do a teardown/tank job, and so despite the lack of demonstrative progress in MLB, I don't think his job will be in jeopardy. Maybe if the team loses close to 100 games again, it will be a different story, but regardless I think this still plays some role here (and also maybe with the preference for one year deals).

 

[DJ Spinoza]

Also wanted to throw this up here. I think it's a nod in the right directly and without fully checking, Mackey's report from late in the season or early offseason about us spending 20-30M has turned out to be true. However, this is the kind of thing that I am pretty skeptical about because the Pirates completely punted on a pretty deep free agency market in order to prefer one year deals that should help them have a fighting chance to be more competent (a new projection dropped today or yesterday that has us 3rd in the NL Central, which I think is possible) but then have to reinvent the wheel next offseason.

Sure, it is nice to get some clearer nods about future spending, and I think Mackey is even-handed in terms of not just wildly speculating when it comes to specifics like this, but it's also still empty rhetoric. Weirdly, this now makes me basically want Cherington extended ASAP because otherwise, it might even be more empty. If the 2023 team underperforms badly and Cherington is fired, then the transition will end up giving more cover for the same old BS.

If we sign one more player, again without looking, I'm guessing that the payroll will be closer to the quasi-respectable range of 80-85M, so even though I find the lack of longer-term commitment to be frustrating, I'll pipe down and watch the games. But even with the recent news... I have nothing against going for Hill for one year and will truly be looking forward to watching him pitch. However, Boston just signed Kluber for one year and a club option, and that would have been a perfect kind of scenario for the Pirates to get some stability for their rotation in terms of innings. Maybe he doesn't want a team like the Pirates having a club option with him, but 2 guaranteed years is really low risk. I hope I will be eating crow about Velasquez, since it certainly seems like he'll have a strong chance to be in the rotation, but we pretty easily could have just not done that signing, still signed Hill, and then spent whatever it would have taken to also get Kluber.

 

[DJ Spinoza]

A final random thought for a typical offseason triple post from me is that I wouldn't discount the Rangers as emerging in Reynolds talks. They've now signed Eovaldi, which gives them rotation depth like this: deGrom, Gray, Heaney, Perez, Odorizzi, Eovaldi, Dunning, and Otto/Ragans as further depth. That's a pretty deep group and although not all of them are locked up long-term, they clearly are in an aggressive, win-now mode.

They have a deep farm system that has the top echelon pitching talent in Leiter to headline a deal. Their outfield is weak and they don't really have much in the way of OF prospects, either. It might be the perfect sweet spot where they'd really want to be in on Reynolds and would consider the longer-term extension that Reynolds might sign as a bargain relative to what their payroll can be. A deal that was headlined by Leiter and Cole Winn would line up pretty well with injecting pitching into the system, and they have ample depth to add good third and fourth players to a deal.

 

[Empoleon8771]

The thing that makes me hesitate with Leiter a bit is that he was horrible in the minors last year. I think that is in large part due to the Rangers rushing him straight to AA, but it's still worth noting. He was walking way too many guys and hitting a batter about once every 11 innings, so he was definitely having control issues there. He was above a 5 for both FIP and ERA.

I am skeptical that Leiter is a legitimate 55 FV prospect with his walk and control issues (5.4 BB/9), Fangraphs currently has him at a 50 FV control. Bobby Miller is a 50 FV overall and only has a 45 FV control, despite him having pretty damn good walk numbers in the minors over his minor league career (2.7 BB/9).

I'm not scoffing at Leiter at all, I just think that he's not as good of a prospect as he's hyped up to be in some places. I think he's closer to a 50 FV prospect ranked around 40 than a 55 FV prospect ranked around 20.

 

[DJ Spinoza]

Yeah, I agree that there are things not to like about Leiter's profile given the early issues, but without watching him at all I don't have much more to go on. For me, there are inherent risks to all pitching prospects, but I also get the desire and need to prioritize it potential deals. Getting both Leiter and Winn plus maybe someone like Josh Smith or Ezekiel Duran as immediate infield possibilities and a fourth depth piece further away spreads out some of the risk well enough, giving you a rotation candidate in pretty short order, and at least if things go well, an impact pitcher by 2024 or so, but ultimately I still prefer the position player prospects due to risk.

For me, I think the Yankees still offer the best possible options. I'd push for either Volpe + a number of players, including Cabrera or I'd push for Dominguez + Peraza and lesser additional pieces. You either end up with a really premium RH bat in Volpe or the OF prospect and plus middle infielder in Peraza. I can see how the fit isn't perfect, but these are potential impact guys at important positions who are also immediately ready or ready within the next 1.5 seasons. There are other viable packages from other teams, but the conjunction of the kind of talent they have plus the seeming mandate to have an impact offseason makes me the most hopeful about the Yankees.


At the end of the day, though, I think there's still the looming question of why we can't commit to Reynolds for the long haul. It's possible that a trade helps us more after the initial hit, but simply extending him "solves" a lot of the problems. If Cherington is potentially not going to be retained (which I think is a huge assumption, and I'd be skeptical -- the MLB product has been atrocious, but he got the green light to tear down and tank for multiple years, so I have to assume he'll at least get some security through 2025 or so), then you would think that however long Reynolds wants is not much of an issue to him and is being stopped completely by ownership.

And I still come back around to the cynical idea that you could extend him long-term and even then bail after 2026 or so, leaving another team on the hook for most of the actual money. If he performs, you might even get the kinds of packages that I bet are on the table right now anyways. The only way it even makes sense to think about trading him is for potential immediate impact prospects. I worry that he's being held onto in order to save face and salvage some of 2023 for Cherington's sake, but I do think that the price with an impact player at the front of the package is going to be met. There are just too many possible suitors still. If I had to guess, talks will heat up over the next few weeks and he'll be dealt by mid-January.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Wilson DFA'd to make room for Garcia.

 

[Factorial]

Anything that leads to Wilson being DFA'ed is good with me.

 

[DJ Spinoza]

Wilson was a real let down by the end, though I am not sure we were ever going to get much for Rodriguez anyways. It's extremely minor, but from a roster and depth chart standpoint, I think it makes sense to try and pass Wilson through waivers now instead of DFAing Swaggerty or someone else. I'd be floored if someone claimed Wilson, but he's not the worst player in the world to keep in the organization as emergency depth like 9th or so on the depth chart as a AAA starter.

One thing I don't really get is the current front office really souring on Swaggerty. He seems to have carrying skills in speed and defense that at least make him a viable 4th OF type. Again, this is extremely minor, but unless we make a meaningful addition to the position group, I hope Swaggerty will survive until spring training so that we can see what he does. I would even rather DFA Vilade ahead of him.

Based on how candid Cherington has been, I am sort of expecting at least one more minor addition. It seems like infield is what could be useful, but I can see it being an OF, doubly so if we will actually trade Reynolds. The depth isn't as certain as what you might want, but Bae and Castro can probably cover the 2B spot and backing up at SS and 3B. I've still got my fingers crossed for Cutch a bit.

 

[ChaosAgent]

The thing that makes me hesitate with Leiter a bit is that he was horrible in the minors last year. I think that is in large part due to the Rangers rushing him straight to AA, but it's still worth noting. He was walking way too many guys and hitting a batter about once every 11 innings, so he was definitely having control issues there. He was above a 5 for both FIP and ERA.

I am skeptical that Leiter is a legitimate 55 FV prospect with his walk and control issues (5.4 BB/9), Fangraphs currently has him at a 50 FV control. Bobby Miller is a 50 FV overall and only has a 45 FV control, despite him having pretty damn good walk numbers in the minors over his minor league career (2.7 BB/9).

I'm not scoffing at Leiter at all, I just think that he's not as good of a prospect as he's hyped up to be in some places. I think he's closer to a 50 FV prospect ranked around 40 than a 55 FV prospect ranked around 20.

I was on the Letter train for a bit in 2021 but then I started looking at some of those called third strikes with the fastball. A lot of the calls were absurd. Reputation calls. Safe to say with robot umps he will struggle.

 

[Gallatin]

Hard to complain much about adding an 8M pitcher as competent as Hill who really pushes guys like Wilson and Thompson away from the rotation (and Thompson still has 3 options left, so he'll definitely be ticketed as starter depth in AAA if that matters). I do have some scattered thoughts that are probably something like nitpicks:

1) Hill has never been the most durable pitcher, and innings stability is the biggest thing the rotation definitely needs IMO. If he can give you 160 (or the rough equivalent pace, assuming he's ticketed to be traded), that's perfectly workable, but there is a little bit of risk that he could be out of commission for a month or so early in the year.

2) Again with the one year deals, though obviously Hill is probably not getting 2-year deals anywhere. This is a bit of a separate issue, but I almost wonder if Reynolds' trade request threw a slight wrench into the plans. It's well within the realm of possibility that BC never intended to sign a multi-year guy, but the way things are shaping up right now has this season looking like a "let's improve while also having some veterans to trade off, our best player to sort out, and a lot of money coming off the books next winter".

3) I'm resigned to it, but a little bit worried/frustrated at how the rotation depth seems lined up to push Ortiz to AAA until Super Two clears for him. I'm sure there's an argument that with his lack of experience in the upper minors, the polish will be good for him, but based on stuff, he's a better option than Oviedo and certainly Velasquez, who it sounds like has a handshake deal to start here.

We'll see - I'm not too worried about depth questions because they have a way of working themselves out with pitchers. I do have to wonder if it wouldn't have been better to just take some combination of these moves and invest the money into a mid-rotation workhorse type guy over 4 years. The payroll space should be there, or we're just joking around.

I'm open to the argument about flexibility and at the end of the day I guess there's no getting around the reality that we're a back-to-back 100 loss team who is chasing 75 wins as a start. There's only so much excitement that is possible in an offseason... finding some way to get back to the table with Reynolds, or full and completely pivoting to get Cruz signed long-term are about the only things that can do it. Otherwise, I am looking forward to a team that will be more watchable on paper, knowing that it will be frustrating if guys like Endy and Ortiz are held down in AAA. Flexibility should also give you the option of rewarding prospects with MLB playing time, and I don't think there's a better use of a "meh 75 win" season than starting to get some experience for guys who have to be big contributors ASAP.

Final thing is that I am pretty curious if we'll make one more somewhat notable position player signing. The OF is crowded, but Cutch still seems easily doable on a 1-2 year deal. Maybe a guy like Pollock has some upside left and will be looking at one year offers.

You really believe Oviedo is ready? I don't. He needs to finish developing that 3rd pitch in the minors IMO.

You can't count on the control we saw his 1st couple starts. And his 100mph heat is too hittable without good location and an effective Change.

 

[DJ Spinoza]

For me, the question is not so much who is definitely ready as it is that if a player has cleared a threshold to debut in MLB, they should have the opportunity to earn a spot based on performance in spring training and the general depth chart. Cherington has repeatedly staked out a position that AAA isn't a meaningful developmental league, so I'd just like to see it followed with some consistency.

To answer more directly, I am totally willing to accept the argument that Ortiz needs more time to polish his sequencing and expand his arsenal in AAA, but I don't think it's open and shut. He could probably benefit from MLB experience and the ability to interact with the veterans on the team, or even someone with a little bit more experience than him in Contreras. I also don't think there's a straight line between developing a pitch in AAA successfully and then coming back to MLB. The pitch still needs to be good enough to get MLB hitters out, and IMO he should be working on a pitch over the offseason so that the situation can be assessed in spring training.

That said, even if we just assume he'll go down to refine his approach for a bit, I have a hard time seeing it as a viable option until after Super Two, which I suspect might be the plan. There's probably a window of viability where they gain an extra year of control over the course of 6 weeks or so to start the season while they see what they have with Oviedo and/or Velasquez, but if they do a repeat of how they handled Contreras last year, it is going to be ridiculous.

I've been extremely vocal and annoying about how I don't think service time manipulation is actually worth it in most cases. I think the more obvious example of this right now given the current roster construction is Endy Rodriguez. There will be the excuse that he doesn't have a ton of time above A ball, but he crushed it last year and right now, there's an easy path to playing 5 times a week to start the season in MLB even if Hedges is catching 3/4ths of the games at first. If we add a viable starting option in the OF, then there's more cover to be worried about his playing time in addition to becoming a better catcher, but at the end of the day, I would just like to see a team try to win by playing its best players.

 

[DJ Spinoza]

Just to expand a bit, I think the rotation is relatively locked down as we head into spring training, assuming no weird injuries:

1) Keller -- not a "#1 starter", obviously, but I'd give him the slight edge as someone who might still take further steps forward. One thing that will be interesting to watch with him are the rumors that he and Brubaker were available for the right price at last year's deadline. Keller might be a low-key smart extension candidate, since we are going to need pitching and he's only under team control through 2025. The time to gamble on that kind of extension is really this offseason, leveraging the control to get some cost certainty through the arbitration years and buy out maybe two years of free agency.

2) Hill -- don't think this is too complicated. We'll have to see how the order lines up, but I presume Keller and Hill will start Opening Day Road and Home in some capacity.

3) Contreras -- again, don't think it's too complicated, as he's obviously a lock. The main thing with him will be health and managing his innings somewhat, as he only had 130 last year. I can see them trying to push that up to 160 or so depending on how things are playing out, so he might be someone who actually gets slated as the "#5 starter" in the order to start the season, in order to possibly delay his start by a few weeks.

4) Brubaker -- same as above. I don't think he's as sure of a lock, but it would take surprising developments in spring training for a guy who threw 144 innings and put up a 2-win season to lose his spot. I've long gone back and forth on whether he's a rotation guy or better as a multi-inning weapon, but at this point I think he's been a starter for so long that trying to complicate things doesn't make sense

5) Oviedo or Velasquez -- the way the VV signing went down makes it seem like he has a handshake agreement to have a chance to start, so I think at minimum he will be able to earn this spot in spring training. Oviedo's stuff really popped in a couple of outings, so you have to think he's in the mix. I think both are probably locks to make the team and given their fastballs, the one who is more of a long reliever might make a ton of sense as a piggyback partner for Hill.


That leaves Ortiz pretty clearly on the outside looking in, and I think from a roster construction standpoint it's ok to have him back in AAA as the likely outcome of the spring. If he comes in with a new pitch that looks good, he should be able to play into the competition for the 5th spot, but as long as it isn't full blown "he's down until Super Two passes no matter what", I'm not going to be up in arms.

One of Oviedo or Velasquez is likely slated as the long-man, with Ortiz and then Thompson being in the AAA rotation as starters 6 and 7 on the depth chart. AAA shouldn't be so crowded, so Wilson likely figures there as 8th once he passes through waivers.

I think there's still room for a NRI to spring training that could also be in the mix for the 5th spot, especially if that player can also work as long relief. I'd be floored to see it happen, but signing Fujinami (to a real contract, he's not coming from Japan to be a NRI on the Pirates obviously) would be an interesting way to give yourself another option at 5th starter and a bullpen boost if not.

 

[DJ Spinoza]

I can't find where Morosi actually said it, but apparently his speculation/reporting after the Blue Jays acquired Varsho is that the Mariners, Yankees, and Dodgers are the strongest candidates for Reynolds, with it being more promising for the Mariners. If you remember, he thought there could be a matchup for the Jays and Reynolds, which did make sense. Since I can't find where Morosi did say this, I am not sure if it's more informed speculation or an updated rumor, but it also seems relatively obvious that these three would be strong candidates to go for Reynolds.

Thought it was worth quickly tagging on in light of the rotation ramble I threw up yesterday. For the Mariners, I think any deal pretty much needs to include Kirby or Gilbert, and I would imagine that rightfully makes them buckle. I had been leaning more towards Kirby on the assumption that his ceiling might not quite be as high as Gilbert, but glancing through Mariners' fans posts almost gives the opposite suggestion, with the few I am seeing who are willing to entertain one of these two guys including Gilbert instead (maybe because Kirby is controllable for longer).

If we did get one of the Mariners starters, that immediately makes the rotation a lot more interesting with Brubaker pushed to 5th starter.

Any talk of the Dodgers has been speculation, but there are rarely rumors about them and I think they could really be the frontrunners. They have the ammo to have the impact pitching talent in a package which is also supplemented by good and immediately ready bats. If they would do Miller, Pages ++, I think that might be the best all-around type of thing, and the Pirates may even prefer that kind of package because you'd easily be able to keep the best two prospects in AA/AAA until Super Two clears this year, as they are more in line with Endy/Davis than obvious immediate candidates (even if these players could theoretically make a team out of spring training).

The Yankees situation is a bit peculiar with the lack of SP headliners. I don't even regard the idea of Nestor Cortes as worth thinking about, because I don't get why they'd deal him. The latest from Heyman suggests that they want to avoid going into the next luxury tax bracket, which they are currently 3M away from. Maybe there's the possibility of taking Hicks and his contract back in a deal, and thereby getting the true top flight talent as a headliner (I think Volpe is probably better than any other single player who could be acquired, with the exception of Kirby/Gilbert), but that's really a stretch to me.

Finally, in light of the Hill signing, if the Marlins would move both Cabrera and Rogers, then our SP suddenly becomes a deep group. I think it would be surprising to see Brubaker on the outside looking in, but acquiring both of these guys might set up a scenario where Brubaker goes to the pen where his stuff plays up and he and/or Keller are potential trade chips at the deadline for a big haul. I think this makes a matchup with the Marlins overly complicated, as the Pirates need to improve their roster so much that multiple big deals involving some of the only important younger guys they have seems like a bit much... in other words, if you are already going to trade Reynolds, it will be hard enough to get to that 75-win plateau or whatever. Cabrera+Rogers would help you a lot, but then subtracting Keller might be risky for the 2024 team.


tldr; is that I think the Dodgers are now best poised to make a deal happen. What worries me is if they are willing to trade Miller given all of his hype, that's a bit of a yellow flag. Especially with Buehler's future a question mark, it would make sense to hang onto Miller for now. It's not like they desperately need Reynolds right away. The only potential caveat that might make them care less is if they are absolutely going to top whatever anyone else will do for Ohtani next winter, in which case getting Reynolds and his cost-controlled years might be very appealing.