I agree in general, although one thing I'd like to think more about is how to gauge and typify what makes the difference between the WC periphery of mediocre and above and below that. The obvious answer to me is having enough impact players spread around the team, without serious weaknesses. I could probably make this more precise by turning to some stats, but outside of a couple rough spells, the obvious problem with last year's team was the offensive production from pretty much the entire infield. It's within the realm of possibility that this will improve in 2019, but there doesn't seem to be much of a chance to get a real impact player (which is why Tulo, and to a much greater extent Segura, were so enticing).
I don't say this in order to totally sanction mediocrity, but it will be interesting to track what happens if the infield does at least creep back up closer to middle of the pack offensively. Last year's team did some important things right, starting with divisional play. We probably can't bank on a 5 game sweep of the Brewers again, but without any real backing other than gut instinct, solid and consistent starting pitching and a lock down bullpen seem like big ingredients to repeat that success.
Where I think things go most awry for the sustained-mediocrity approach is that we are simply too vulnerable towards the vicissitudes of a long season. This is a trite cliche that's true for almost all teams, but the wrong set of sequences can tilt things in a hurry for this team. Not only do we have to wonder about the C production, Polanco's return, but even in the event that the infielders produce better, we still seem too prone to extended stretches where offense is a tough slog, largely but not exclusively due to lack of power. A big injury or underperformance from one of the starters, or some bullpen troubles, and all of a sudden we can suffer some spiral stretches. I'll save myself and everyone else from rehashing those moments last year, but I think that's the biggest internal problem facing the team, and I think it can be chiefly attributed to coaching. It's probably a good argument to say that the team ends up somewhere vaguely in the consistent-mediocrity range no matter what, and while I agree, I also spent a ton of time watching last year's team, and they could have crawled into a WC game.
So I guess this runs the risk of being too easy on NH, but in a sense I don't think the sustained mediocrity baseline is a totally insane idea. I think his big problems are more in terms of specific issues, and also a generalized conservatism. I think it's a little too easy and too much of a strawman to say that the only viable approach is to totally go all in and then completely rebuild from scratch, because prospects are quite fickle in MLB and really rebuilding is easier said than done, especially when you won't utilize the payroll aggressively. Having said that, I think that besides a lackluster farm in terms of impact bats, the obvious issue is still that aggressiveness has been too lacking when it could really be utilized. Huntington has done some solid things to keep the team in an ok position and generally field a competitive team, but even with completely lined up controllable young talent and guys like Archer, Marte, Polanco all on controlled contracts, it's very obvious that this team only has a certain window and none of his words or actions since the Archer and Kela trades reflect that. Tim Williams had a good twitter thread to this effect earlier today or yesterday. The window will end after 2021 or 2022. With enough talent and some luck, maybe we'll tread water and be somewhat worse but still sustaining mediocrity, which is sort of the story of 2015-present. Is he going to repeat all the same mistakes?
I intended to type up a long hypothetical on moving Cervelli for value and then signing Grandal, but maybe I'll wait until January is at least in the teens to start getting on crazy levels of never gonna happen chess. The analytics wing of Pirates twitter seems to be all over Grandal, and while it's risky, I could see some logic to it. In particular, the rumor is that Grandal's suitors are dwindling, and that he may not be able to command more than the Mets offer of 4 years, 60 million that he turned down earlier in the winter. If you can actually flip Cervelli for some ok value and then turn around and make that kind of signing, though, it would be precisely the kind of aggressive gamble that NH never takes.
There's huge risk to giving a 30 year old catcher that much money, but it's not an unworkable amount of money, and spans the window that is currently open. It's a lot more affordable than a Machado, obviously, and especially if you get real value for Cervelli, really does give the team an immediate boost, maybe bumping attendance numbers back to where Nutting is slightly less of a miser...i.e., even at 15 mil/year, Grandal isn't really that expensive: most of the rest of the team either has a guaranteed salary or will be playing for the minimum or a modest amount. Literally, outside of signing a veteran SS or RP, there's no one making close to that amount, so the payroll would remain approximately the same.
I guess I've walked myself into this hypothetical and it's too late for me to comb back any of this verbosity, but at first glance, I like this never-gonna-happen-idea much more than I expected I would. The reality likely may be that the Dodgers step back in and give him an expensive one year deal as a stopgap, which is doubly bad for getting value from Cervelli, but maybe they sign Harper and don't want to do that. But I mean, halfway realistically for a moment, as risky as that deal would be, once Cervelli's salary is cleared, it changes basically nothing for at least this year and next. Smart small market baseball says get the value we can get for Cervelli now and shift to Diaz. The Pirates way says kinda the same thing, but more emphasis on clear the money and risk of Cervelli and turn to Diaz. A bolder gamble would be this kind of contract, banking at least on exceptionally good catcher production for the next two years, and figuring out the rest as you go. Let the infield carousel play itself out, and hopefully by the time we reach July or August, we have some hopeful-looking answers at some spots as well as Keller stepping into the rotation.
As bonkers as it initially seems, it might be the straightest path towards maximizing the kind of offense we can put out there. Outside of maybe a stopgap gamble on Dozier, there just isn't impact in the way we need it to be had other than a trade. Ok, this has turned into such a waste of all of our time that I just need to cease writing now, but I guess that's the plan: trade Cervelli for Taylor, shock everyone by signing Grandal, then profit.
