Episode 364 - The Offseason Awards Show

Pitchers and catchers have reported! Russ and Ben get together for a brief offseason recap in the form of an awards show, taking a look at the good, the bad and the wonderful of winter.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:20):
Hello, and welcome to you Backflips and Nerds, the Baseball
Podcast with a British twist. I am your host this evening,
Ross Lisam and I am joined by Ben Carter.

Speaker 2 (00:30):
How are you doing? Ben?

Speaker 3 (00:32):
Very good? Thanks Ross.

Speaker 4 (00:33):
Yeah, excited to be back on the pod after a
little little break. So yeah, good to talk from baseball
pictures and catchers are reported.

Speaker 3 (00:39):
How exciting.

Speaker 1 (00:41):
Yes, the superb Owl has passed and we are now
in what can only be described as baseball season. So
as as those pictures and catchers report, and we start
to hear many a more story from writers having direct
access to players. Over the next few days and weeks,
Ben and I are going to go through some off
season awards and some good, some bad, some dan Aglers,

(01:07):
as the powercast boys would say, and we're all going
to start off with. So started with a fairly simple one,
the Biggest Offseason Winner Award. Ben, who would you think
are your nominations for this award?

Speaker 4 (01:24):
I think to be an off season winner, you have
to do something and that probably rules out close to
half the teams in the league in terms of being
active this winter, because we've seen quite a few teams
sit on their hands and not necessarily do much. So
for me, there were a few teams that were up
for this award. I think no one could argue that

(01:45):
a few teams in the air least and put their
hands up and try and do something this offseason. The Yankees,
Red Sox, Blue Jays or made moves, and I like
what most of those teams did, so they were all
in contention. For me, the Ale Central perhaps is expected,
not a whole ton of moves apart from some sort
of small adjustments around the edges of the roster, shall
we say, in the National League. I think again, a

(02:06):
few teams that could be open to open to this award,
and ultimately that's where I landed with this. I thought
about the Mets. I think we'll talk about them at
some point on this podcast. Was part of this award ceremony,
as you would expect, but I went boring and I
went straight back and I went with the Dodgers. I
know it's hard to give offseason winner award to the

(02:26):
team that just went and won.

Speaker 3 (02:27):
The World Series.

Speaker 4 (02:29):
You would think the only way is down, but I
think when you look at the quantity and quality of
players that they signed, re signed kept on the roster
added to the roster versus those that they got rid of.
It's hard to argue that they didn't improve. And I
think when you start with a roster as strong as

(02:50):
theirs was, and then you end the winter with an
improved roster and sickening depth both in the lineup and
the rotation, it's dull. But I think it's only right
to say that they are one of the big off
season winners. We talked about Rocky Sosaki. He's probably the
headliner guy, but there's also Blake Snell, Tiosca, Hernandez resigned

(03:13):
as Tanna Scott heis young, Kim Conforto trying to resigned,
Kershaw seemingly resigned.

Speaker 3 (03:19):
The list kind of goes on.

Speaker 4 (03:21):
It's been another winter where the Dodgers have been dominant
in the market, and they get my pick for off
season winner. So I know it's boring. I know people
will boo and hiss, but they get my nod.

Speaker 1 (03:34):
That's interesting. Personally, I think I probably would have gone
with the Mets. I think that the changes that they've
made has made more of a difference about whether they
will make the playoffs and do something. I think that
the Dodgers like rightly, as you said, have made moves
that have made that team better, which is scary. And

(03:56):
they do see the top most of the projections and
anything out there saying that who's going to be favorites
to win next season. But I think the differences in
what was made in New York. I think the addition
obviously of Juan Soto, and obviously not just with him,
with bringing back kind of like Maniah, with a kind

(04:17):
of like adding in a few others that actually kind
of makes it the bring back of a Loonso adding
Clay Holmes and Frankie Montes, so I think really kind
of fills out that's squad quite well to the point
now where I would still put Atlanta favorites in that division.
But I think that it's now a kind of closer

(04:38):
to toss up situation with them and with Philly and
the Mets all being kind of fairly like in line
with each other. So they've now got equally all got
a tough task to kind of get to that to
that kind of either that winning spot or to that
playoff spot that they're going to be aiming for. But

(04:59):
I imagine now that it's probably kind of like it's
made the most difference from the Mets making those moves.

Speaker 4 (05:09):
Yeah, you won't get any argumence from me when it
comes to praising the Mets. I like what they did
this offseason. I think I think you're right that in
terms of moving the needle, maybe they jumped to the
front of the queue because the Dodgers were good before
they will be good again, and not that the Mets
were bad last year. But but I think, like you say,
they're in a division where there's this serious competition for

(05:29):
that division title, with that the Braves and the Phillies
and who knows what the minds of Nationals will be.
And I think they definitely have put themselves in pole
position to be favorites for that division with the moves
that they made, you know, some big and splashy, in
others more savvy. But yeah, I think they've They've had
a very active offseason, as most people anticipated they would do.

(05:50):
But it's hard to argue that they haven't made their
team a lot better and made themselves a real contender
in that division and in the league.

Speaker 3 (05:56):
As a whole.

Speaker 1 (05:58):
Yeah, definitely, I think that the bulk probably that the
Mets have added is my only tiny difference I think
LA obviously with the two premium pitchers that they've added
in and effectively created a bullpen, which is also just
as ridiculous as that starting rotation is good, but I

(06:18):
think they're not a significant amount of bat changes makes
that go with there. So that's but I think we
can stick with the duel awards there. I think we
don't need to argue too much about who's right who's
wrong on that side. Our next one would be a
biggest offseason surprise award, And I'll go first here and
I might actually I'm going to say the Dodgers here

(06:39):
because I was expecting like them to potentially be evolved
with Sasaki. I always expecting them to mess around the
edges with their kind of seven to nine spots and
with their bullpen like they've done before. I was not
expecting them to come out of the bat and make
a huge signing with Blake Snell. The Osco signing is

(07:03):
maybe something that was actually possible, but it still wasn't
something I was expecting them to kind of do based
on some of their their track record with some of
the teams. So them actually kind of not doing sometimes
what people do when they win where they stand pat
or they offer big contracts to some of their top players.

Speaker 2 (07:21):
Well they did that with with ti Osca.

Speaker 1 (07:23):
Who is was leaving, but they've kind of continued to
push when some of the other top teams in this
in the NL and across the whole event of MLB
have kind of not really pushed themselves to be actually
like better teams.

Speaker 3 (07:42):
Yeah, I finally, Yeah, I don't know.

Speaker 4 (07:45):
I guess it wasn't surprising to me, but nothing, I
just does it? Does it surprising to me?

Speaker 3 (07:51):
These days?

Speaker 4 (07:51):
They just find ways to make the team better, and
they matter the cost, it seems, so for this I
had a couple of answers. I have one that was
kind of like the most surprising move, which to me
was Corbyn Burns the Diamondbacks. I think we all considered
different places that made sense as landing spots for him.

(08:14):
And I'm not saying no one saw this coming, but
I certainly didn't see the Diamondbacks as being a team
that would be at the top of that list or
even in the top five teams in the running for him,
And it kind of felt like that news came out
with Blue right, there was a lot of rumors about
where he might go, and a lot of he could
make a decision as early as this week. This was
obviously back fairly early in free agency. I just didn't
see Diarmdbacks as a team that would be in for him,

(08:36):
and they very much were and that proved to be, yeah,
something of a shock, and I like that move for them.
I think he's he was clearly the top of the
free agent market for starting pitchers. I think it's a
huge loss for the Orioles not to have him on
their team next year, even what he provided them last year.
But I loved that move that Dimondbacks, but it certainly
came as a surprise. And then from a team perspective,

(08:58):
I actually went with the Giants. I thought it were
going to be very active this offseason because I felt
like they had set themselves up with flexibility payroll wise.
I felt like they were a position where they've been
stuck a little bit in no man's land from a
competitive standpoint for a couple of years now, which is
unlike them. Obviously, Posey taking over as president at Baseball Operations,

(09:21):
and I guess they did make a splash in the
Williard Damas signing, but that to me in itself was
a surprise. He just didn't feel like a very giantcy signing.
And I know they've had a hole at shortstop for
a long time, and I think he does feel that
whole well. And whilst I don't love the deal from
a pure value perspective, I think.

Speaker 3 (09:38):
He'll probably be good there.

Speaker 4 (09:40):
It just wasn't the player I was expecting them to
go after. Same with Justin Verlander. Again, I don't hate
that deal one year. They such thing as a bad
one year deal, but I just didn't really have him
down as a guy the Giants would go after. And
I think all the people who I kind of had
them pentled in as being in the market for never
really came to fruition. And again, who's to say if

(10:01):
that proves to be.

Speaker 3 (10:03):
Right or wrong.

Speaker 4 (10:03):
I think the Giants have been the benefit of the
doubt over the years with some of the shrewd moves
that they've made. But I thought they were going to
be more active in terms of quantity of moves of
soft season, and I thought the big moves they made
were going to be very different to the ones that
they did. So I'm a little bit surprised to be
sat here in February looking at their roster the way
it's kind of worked out after winter.

Speaker 1 (10:25):
Yeah, I think, as I said, like that, what's gone
on in some of that an L division, it's very
difficult to you see that Dodgers continue to push and
you're like, well, you guys have all got to make
yourselves significantly better to even cope. The Padres seemingly with
what's either going on internally or with all the issues
around ownership, have kind of tried to stand pat but

(10:47):
get better. It's hard to do that. You don't have
like Juan Soda to trade this year to kind of
do that. The Diamondbacks, I think that that signing of
Burns is a significant one, and I think if we
were doing signings that were surprising, I would have only
put us of Kakuci signing with the Angels like almost

(11:10):
like immediately at the start of the off season as
the one that I was like, excuse me, what I was,
just like Kakuci just off the back of a great season,
Like the Angels Really that was more of it, just
like you agreed to sign with them, And I guess
that was maybe a little bit what you were saying
with with Corman Burns, but there have been discussions coming

(11:31):
out to say that he lives in Arizona or whatever.
He has family in those sorts of places. So once
they offered something that was high, supposedly he turned down
twenty thirty forty million more to play in other places.
But I guess for some people, like once you've been
offered like a couple hundred million or whatever, it's just
like it doesn't really matter too much more and you

(11:52):
can keep the few creature comforts that you actually have.
Not wrong, Okay, So now will move on to our
most Improved Team Award or what I've liked to call
the Royals Award based on last season where they frantically

(12:12):
switched from a close to one hundred lost team to
a playoff contending team. Ben, who do you have as
some potentials here?

Speaker 3 (12:24):
I think there are quite a lot of teams that
improved over the winter.

Speaker 4 (12:28):
Some of the ones we talked about as sort of
the off season winners, I think they all improved over
the winter. It pains me to say it, but I
think the Angels improved over the winter the Kakuochie deal.
As you mentioned, they've they've been fairly active They've brought
in some interesting players on short and long term deals
that I like. I think anytime you talk about most improved,

(12:48):
you know, hey, maybe the White Socks rink contention, considering
how just dreadful they were last year, you know, and
the base they were starting from, any.

Speaker 3 (12:56):
Sort of improvement would be improvement overall.

Speaker 4 (13:01):
But I actually went and this maybe a little bit surprising,
but I actually went with the athletics. I quite like
the winter they've had, I think shockingly active by their
usual standards in actually bringing in free agents. I liked
the Severino deal. I liked getting a few of these
guys are Sheller a clerk on one year deals. I

(13:24):
like the trade with the Rays getting Jeffrey Springs. You know,
none of these are super sexy and gonna fought them
into contention, but I think we were probably, or at
least I was a little surprised last year with how
sneaky good they were and sneaky competitive they were. And
I think they've had a sneaky good winter and added

(13:44):
guys that will help them get better without being you know,
bank breaking, or without having to give up.

Speaker 3 (13:52):
Tons of prospects.

Speaker 4 (13:53):
So lots of question marks still around what the hell
the future holds for this franchise. But I quite like
the winter they had, and I think that they've they've improved.
If nothing else, they've they've added players who will be
good for them, and I think they'll be again a
team that goes under the radar as fairly strong as
in twenty twenty five.

Speaker 1 (14:12):
Yes, I think the Obviously, then adding the extension for
Brent Rooker as well kind of gives them that centerpiece
for who's going to be the face of that franchise. Yeah,
while it has its time in in Sacramento and before
it i'd say eventually heads to Los Angeles.

Speaker 2 (14:32):
Obviously. The slightly.

Speaker 1 (14:36):
Depressing side of it is kind of the fact that
it looks like it's only occurred because they're within chance
of getting agrievance from the Players Association if they don't
spend a certain amount, and they've been running foul of
that for as long as they possibly could before actually
spending the money, So then getting out of Oakland and
now they would be like, oh, look, we can spendillion

(14:58):
more or we have to spend fifty million or does
have a like a bitter taste in the mouth for
me personally, but yes, I can see why you would
think that on the way, I think for me, the
team that I would go is, I think the Chicago
Cubs have done a lot, and I think they've done

(15:21):
a lot in a division where doing it will make
a massive impact. I think they're now probably maybe just
about the favorites for that division. I don't think it's
going to be particularly much like the NL Central, like
the AL Central. It's a pretty compressed like division. I think,
especially with the pitching available that the Pirates have, you

(15:44):
wouldn't surprise me if you had like three three teams
or probably all five teams in or and around like
the low eighties and high seventies, because none of them
are exceptional. But what with the Cubs like additions that
they've done, I think they've really put themselves in a
place to actually like make an effort to to kind

(16:04):
of go forward and do this. Obviously, starting off with
the trade for Cult Tucker, I think him being brought
in it was a bit weird that they then kind
of took him to arbitration afterwards, which you're always a
bit like, excuse me, what. But I think they've they've
added well to kind of like the back of the bullpen,
and I think they've added well to their bench, which

(16:26):
it's not necessarily the most glamorous thing to do, but
having Presley as well, having now they've picked up Brazier
from the Dodgers as part of that them getting rid
of Brazier over because they've created too big, too.

Speaker 2 (16:39):
Good of a bullpen. I think.

Speaker 1 (16:41):
I think the Cubs now are in a really good
position to take a strong run at that n L
Central Yeah.

Speaker 3 (16:47):
I agree. I like what the clubs have done.

Speaker 4 (16:49):
I think Tucker's a legit superstar, and yeah, contract for
grievances aside, I think they've landed on a really good
sort of new face of the franchise, if you will,
all out there, and they have other players to go
around him. He's not gonna be on his own in
that regard out there, and Matthew Boyd I think is
a great deal for them and a nice started to

(17:09):
get into the rotation.

Speaker 3 (17:11):
A few other guys that you.

Speaker 4 (17:12):
Mentioned, if you've been added these on, you know through
trade or short term deals that make them a better team.
And I think some of the other teams in that
division have either had you know, quiet or underwhelming off seasons,
and like you mentioned, it's also close as it is
amongst those teams, that doesn't take much for the needle
to move and to make them favorites or at least

(17:33):
a team that can compete for that division. So no,
I know, maybe Couples fans were a bit underwhelmed. I
think that was the expectation they'd make a huge splash
and free agency, and in the end the splash more
came through trade. But I mean, they're still in the
market for Bregman in theory, right, so that could still
come and that would make it a slam dunk off
season for them. But I like what they've done and
I think they're on a good place heading into too

(17:55):
this season.

Speaker 1 (17:57):
Yeah, definitely, I think they they will stand a good chance.
So our next award I've liked to call the Poto Award,
which is for the most active without actually kind of improving.
I feel I would most like to put forward Mike
Cleveland Guardians for this one. I think we have traded

(18:20):
away Miles Shaw, Josh Naylor and him and Z and
they included also then trading away spent to Horowitz, who
was one of the players that we've got for Josh
Nayler and have effectively brought in Louis Ortiz, slave Cy Sae,

(18:40):
basically the any names that you might actually like recognize,
and then from a free agent perspective, Carlo Santana and
Paul Seawold beyond obviously Biba being kind of like brought
back in, but he's going to spend a lot of
time too with a being out still through injury. So
I feel that they've made three key big trades which

(19:04):
partly helped Toronto in their attempt to get Roki Sasaki,
but didn't actually do anything, and they're kind of just
an exactly the same place they were last year, which
is it's a bit about the team that actually the
depth may be okay, but it's still reliant on that bullpen,
and there's a lot of the projection systems have come out,

(19:25):
they're not showing the team to be particularly good for
next season because no one else is really going to
ProCheck that you will have four starters that will be
under two and a half RAS for two years in
a row. Sorry, four relievers who will do that for
two years in a row.

Speaker 4 (19:41):
Yeah, It's been a somewhat shockingly active winter for the Guardians,
but that probably says more about what we expect them
to do most years, right, typically not a team that
liked to go out and make splashes in winter. But yeah,
it's hard to put your finger on any of these
that like significantly.

Speaker 3 (19:59):
Move the need for them.

Speaker 4 (20:02):
I don't hate what they've done, but like you say,
I think they're probably quite reliant on being able to
cook up more of that kind of ballpen magic that
they had last year. And you know, if there's one
thing we've learned is that that is not particularly consistent
year to year, so there's maybe a degree of negative
regression that will come with that. But I've kind of
learned over the years to give the Guardians benefit of

(20:23):
the doubt and they'll probably find some starting picture that
no one's heard of who will be a star. So
I'm kind of relying on them to do that again
a team that I went with. And this might prove
controversial because I know some people in our podcast, particularly
like the winter that this team has had, but I
have not been impressed with what the Rangers have done.

(20:47):
I just don't think they've made their team much better
over the course of the winter. They've been active, they've
made a lot of one year deals. They resigned Yavaldi
to a long term deal.

Speaker 3 (20:57):
I like that move.

Speaker 4 (20:57):
I'm not you know, I don't think your valdis a
bad picture old pitcher. Yes, three years may be questionable
in terms of length. Certainly he's had his injuries over
the years, but I think when healthy he's still a
good starter. But the Jock Peterson deal for a guy
who doesn't play in the field and can only hit
right handers, don't love him getting two years, and some

(21:18):
of the other guys he Gashioka, doesn't move the need
or any of these one year deals. I mean, there's
such thing as a bad one year deal, right, But
not convinced any of these guys are making them much better.
Jake Berger in the trade of the Marlins. I know
there are certain Marlins fans who love what Burger is,
but again I'm not sure that that's a great move
from him. And as a guy there go that will

(21:39):
get onto at some point later that I think so
a loss. So yeah, not to mention Max scherzokab Yates,
I mean, as a bunch of guys who have been
good contributors who've now left so certainly busy active. Maybe
there's more to come from them, But I do not
sit here now honestly thinking the Rangers are a much
better team than they were last year. And we went

(22:00):
into last year talking about how they were gonna be
disappointing and that the World Series when was great but
didn't necessarily mean they were going to be a superstar
team last year. I don't feel any different again this
year that they're going to bounce back and something be
amazing unless they get lucky with health.

Speaker 3 (22:16):
So yeah, sorry, thanks to Strangers fans.

Speaker 4 (22:17):
We have had nice thing to say about you recently,
but I'm going to poop it a little bit here. Yeah,
it's an interesting one because I think health is more
of the question than like what this squad actually is.
It's like they got reasonable seasons from both Sega and
Simeon last year, but they didn't get what they were
maybe wanting from Why at Langford. And but you're you're right,

(22:41):
the kind of this season is potentially down to how
many innings does Jacob d Grom pitch. Like, if Jacob
de Grom pitches one hundred and sixty innings, Texas are
probably going to have a fairly good season. Their entire
ballpen I think is going to almost be different to
what it was last year, which when you want to
talk about making a lot of moves that might end
up having no difference on the season.

Speaker 2 (23:02):
You've got it right there.

Speaker 1 (23:04):
Like the roster resource right now has basically their top
kind of like six relievers, all being people that they
picked up by a free agency or trade. So that
definitely kind of means that it's a pretty open ended
question mark there of who is actually gonna go out
and kind of take that opportunity and take that chance.

(23:27):
You're probably going to be led by Chris Martin, but
who knows, Like this could have could be a lot
of smokescreen, as you say, and end up with actually
nothing being the difference, and there will be a seventy
eight win team again this year as they were last year.
I'm a little bit more optimistic, but I can see
why you think that's I think are talented.

Speaker 3 (23:50):
I don't.

Speaker 4 (23:50):
I don't think you're a bad team, to be clear,
and I think they were very unlucky last year, and
there's a natural assuming that some of their guys come
back healthier for longer this year. That and guys Langford
improve and some of the bullpen arms they acquire do
better than their arms did last year. Like that, there's
kind of a natural improvement that will come. I just think,
considering how poorly last year went and how kind of

(24:13):
busy the winter's been for them, I don't sit here
looking at their roster of us as how it ended
last year, thinking like, Wow, they're really toured up, And
then maybe in their mind they didn't have to write.
They just thought, get everyone healthy, hope for better luck.
See if a few new bullpen arms can turn around
our fortunes and do it all over again. I mean,
they won a World Series where they're not dissimilar roster
two years ago, so maybe they know better than we do.

Speaker 1 (24:35):
Yeah, maybe they do, Maybe they don't. We have to
position ourselves here, Ben, as we are the knowles. Here
we are the nerds. So that kind of goes away
from kind of like the team level things. We're now
going to look maybe a bit more specifically at some
individual deals themselves. So I've called one next called the
Manly not Handley Ramirez Award, which is the sneakiest good

(24:58):
move or best move for the season of season so far. Ben,
do you have any suggestions.

Speaker 4 (25:05):
I do, and I'm going back to the Rangers. And
this is why I didn't kind of hinted at this
and didn't say this guy's name. It's the guy they
traded away. It's Nate Lowe, who they traded to the
Washington Nationals, who I guess has never really ascended into
stardom as far as baseball is concerned. He's a first
baseman who has not got outstanding stats over his sort

(25:28):
of five full or four full seasons in the majors,
but he's been a sort of solidly reliable contributor for
that whole period when healthy. Last year he did miss
some time, but they kind of gave him up for
near enough nothing.

Speaker 3 (25:42):
A bullpen arm. Again.

Speaker 4 (25:44):
Maybe it'll end up being a very useful bullpen arm
in Garcia, who they got back from the Nationals.

Speaker 3 (25:51):
But I like this move from the National side. I
think this really works.

Speaker 4 (25:53):
Well for them, giving up a lefty reliever, getting a
first baseman who is under team control for two more years,
who has shown a propensity to hit for power, propensity
to draw walks, who is not going to kill you
defensively at first base.

Speaker 3 (26:08):
I yeah, I like this move a lot for the Nats.

Speaker 4 (26:11):
I think he is coming into there with a ton
of upside as a guy who can be a middle
of the order bat. Again, I don't think this is
the kind of move that makes the National suddenly an
amazing team, And they didn't necessarily do a ton around
this to make me think they're going to be suddenly
competitors in twenty twenty five. But as far as sort
of sneaky under the radar, I like that move trades go.

(26:33):
I really like them picking him up and giving him
a chance to be their everyday first basement.

Speaker 3 (26:38):
So tip of the cap to the Gnats.

Speaker 4 (26:40):
And again that's kind of part of why I wasn't
delighted with the Rangers off seasons, because I think they
kind of let him go for enough nothing.

Speaker 1 (26:48):
Yeah, it's one of those interesting moves where it's a
bit more short to thinking from the Rangers as they
kind of being like, well, we've got to have some
of these players. Now, does Low quite fit in to
everything they have? Potentially not? So they've now been given
another stronger bullpen on to make. To make a difference

(27:09):
for me, I've gone for Hassan Kim. I think that
the value on the deal that the Rays have, I
think is really good. I was personally expecting to pick
up way more than he did. I think a lot
of like the initial projections were out there that he
was going to get probably a two, three or maybe

(27:31):
a four year deal, but he's ended up with this
kind of like two year deal with the Rays, which
could be a pillow contract which he can kind of
like choose out of, or just good stay with the Rays.
But I think that he is a solid, like of
just above average just slightly above average hitter and a

(27:51):
stella outstanding defensive like shortstop. And I think he's undervalued
because we've got so used to this kind of mega
shortstop system that we have now. I think if you
throw Has on Kim, like ten even five years ago,
before we had an all of the birth of like
the mega shortstops, people would be talking him about him
all the time because he would be a lot better

(28:13):
than a lot of the other shortstops that are out there.

Speaker 2 (28:15):
But I believe he's kind of undervalued because of that.

Speaker 1 (28:18):
So it'd be interesting to see how he does with
the Rays, what they will do and make changes with
him that are not necessarily known. Her doing maybe so
much with their picture, but hitters as they are with
their pitchers. But we'll see how well he'll do there.
But I could just see him being a solid kind
of like three four win guy as a minimum, and

(28:41):
maybe he's got like a five win upside to him,
which when they've just spent twenty nine million for two years,
I think it's just such such a good deal.

Speaker 4 (28:50):
Yeah, I'm a Kim fan, and he does feel like
a real Rais player, doesn't he. I guess he had
his market reduce because of the injury, because the fact
he's returning from shoulder surgery and they're not quite sure
and when he'll be back.

Speaker 3 (29:05):
And I guess anytime.

Speaker 4 (29:07):
You hear the words shoulder surgery and it's about a
player who has to throw a ball was a key
part of his job, it probably scares people, even though
actually the recovery rate from those are a lot better
now than they were.

Speaker 3 (29:19):
Twenty thirty years ago.

Speaker 4 (29:21):
So I like the move for them because I think,
you know, at the end of the day, if he
comes back as expected fairly early in the season, has
a great year, opts out great, the Ray's got a
year of high production from him for not much money.
If the injury lingers, and he takes him longer to
come back, he doesn't quite look himself well. Then they
get the actual year on the back of it and
he won't knocked out, and then you kind of assume
he'll return to something close to his old form, which,

(29:43):
like you say, the floor was so high with him
where such an elite defender, you know, good back to
ball skills, has enough power, draws enough walks that like
you're not too worried about the bat where you know
he's just going to be a really solid starting shortstop
for you. Plus he's very fun to watch and a
guy who you know, the Rays could use a player

(30:04):
like him to kind of be a bit of a
spark plug for them.

Speaker 3 (30:06):
So no, I like that move a lot for them.

Speaker 4 (30:09):
I wasn't shocked to see that he ended up having
to take a sort of short term deal just give
him the injury question marks. But it is such a
raise move to kind of find someone who's clearly undervalued
because of those concerns, work out a deal that kind
of shields them from being on the hook for too much,
and you know, with the upside that he could end
up being a real staff for them. Either this year
or the year after at not a huge amount of cost.

Speaker 1 (30:34):
Yeah, I think you said right that Kim was the
injury played difference. I also just think the lack of
availability on some of the top teams, the need for
a shortstop. I think that kind of also heard him
as well. We discussed it in the part a few
weeks back where we're like, well, where can he go?
And you're like, well, actually, probably the best spots in
teams that need him are the Red Sox and the Tigers,

(30:55):
and well, they're both already paying somebody else to not
do that role one via injury one for not being good,
So he's not really going to try and have two
of them on the roster at the same time and
be like, well, actually, like you're not gonna get the
roster time.

Speaker 2 (31:09):
But yeah, we'll see.

Speaker 1 (31:10):
Obviously, only time will tell on these kind of contracts,
but I think any of these kind of like short
term ones, especially these ones that kind of we don't
usually have like the one year deal now, but we
have kind of these kind of two year polo contracts
where it has like has a player option for a
second year where if you kind of bomb out, you've
still managed to get yourself nearly thirty million instead of

(31:31):
just a one year deal.

Speaker 3 (31:33):
The age will the opt out?

Speaker 2 (31:35):
Yeah, the age of the opt out.

Speaker 1 (31:38):
Our next move will next award will be the Mason
Sanders Award. I've duly named this to the Rodeo name
of Madison Bumgardner. If people can remember that time that
we found out that a professional baseball player was potentially
endangering in himself. No, they're potentially endangering himself during his

(32:00):
off season and winning Rodeo awards. But yes, we need
to discuss what is the sneakily worst move of the
off season. Now, I think the concept of an overspend
doesn't exist as much as it used to in Major
League Baseball. I think teams are a little bit smarter

(32:20):
about the way that they behave they don't go for
these sorts of things.

Speaker 2 (32:24):
Obviously, I'm not going to.

Speaker 1 (32:25):
Touch the Sodo deal here because there's no way of
knowing basically whether this is this is not sneakily bad,
because it's just like it's either basically a great contract
and it will go down as one of the best
things that basically done New York Mets did, or will
end up basically being one of the worst contracts of
all time. I don't think there's anywhere probably like in
the middle here. For me, I'm going to go with

(32:49):
Tanner Scott. I I don't like a four year deal
for a reliever, and I don't like a four year
deal for a lever for seventy two million.

Speaker 2 (32:59):
I get why they've done it.

Speaker 1 (33:00):
I get that effectively, the Dodgers are in a win
now mode and the basically the way to get do
get Tanna Scott and to be and everybody else, it's
just to offer the other year that everybody else wouldn't do.
And having that conversation that me and John had win
Sax Scott and knowing that sometimes you need to pay
beyond what your projection is to get the players that

(33:21):
you want, it makes perfect sense. But I really think
that come a year or two, we will be looking
back at this being like, well, it depends if the
Dodgers win like the World Series and he's been crap.
I don't think anybody will care if they don't win
anything else and he's crap. I think this might be
regarded as a very bad deal that was done at
the time.

Speaker 4 (33:44):
Yeah, I agree, a four year deal for Aliva is
almost never a good idea, And I don't think Tanna
Scott is barred by any means. But he's saying doesn't
seem like a picture who would be immune to the
usual risk that you get with a somewhat aging relief picture,
who kind of relies on stuff that is hard to

(34:07):
rely on year to year to be dominant. You know,
he's been great recently. He's showed it for a couple
of different teams. He gives them a lefty and we
know there's a premium on that, and the Dodgers don't
exactly lacking money to spend, as we've seen at a
number of different times.

Speaker 3 (34:25):
But yeah, I agree.

Speaker 4 (34:26):
I didn't love this deal at the time, and I
do think it's one that could look worse in a
year or two, especially if he goes to injuries or
inconsistency and age catches up with him and all the
rest of it. He wasn't the way that I was
going with my answer to this question, though I had
a couple of names in mind, both of which actually
are in New York City.

Speaker 3 (34:49):
One is Max Freed.

Speaker 4 (34:52):
Again, hard to call this a sort of sneaky bad
move because it's eight years at a record two hundred
and eighteen million dollars for a left handed picture, but
for similar reasons.

Speaker 3 (35:02):
I just I'm concerned.

Speaker 4 (35:04):
He's thirty years old, which isn't necessarily that old, but
not on the.

Speaker 3 (35:07):
Younger side for a free agent picture.

Speaker 4 (35:10):
He's always been quite reliant on sort of pinpoint control
and deception and sort of breaking balls versus overpowering hitters.
And that always scares me a little bit, where you
kind of worry that if that control eludes him a
little bit, or if one of those pitches just loses
a little bit of bite, he could quite quickly become
fairly ineffective. So that one scares me a little bit. Again,

(35:31):
I think you're good for the next couple of years.
He definitely gives the Yankees what they need in terms
of competing this year. And you do just with those
top of the market guys. You pay a premium, you
accept the back end of the deal won't look great,
and you just sort of swallow your pills right and
accept that might not be the way it goes.

Speaker 3 (35:44):
But that one concerns me a bit.

Speaker 4 (35:46):
And the other is on the Mets side of town,
was a signing of Clay Holmes I again, great reliever
for the Yankees last year, has proven himself to be
an effective arm I don't love that the Mets are
making him a starter. I guess they have seen what
teams like the Royals did with former Mets reliever Seth
Lugo and turning him into a starter again after long

(36:08):
Stitt in the ballpen, and figure they can do something
similar with Clay Homes. But I just, you know, I'm
concerned that it's not going to work with Homes and
they've kind of committed to him a three year deal
at a kind of starter's salary to be that guy,
and I've not seen anything from him to show that
he can be that guy consistently. Fear he's going to

(36:30):
break down injury wise or be ineffective as a starting pitcher. Like, sure,
you can at the end of the day, you can
move him back to the bullpen, right, It's not a
huge risk in that regard. But they're kind of paying
him in a way that you would suggest that they
think he's going to be a legitimate starting pitcher, and
I think that's a gamble to take, especially considering the
Mets have always struggled with depth in the rotation. So

(36:50):
I didn't love that move for them, Even though I
think he's a good player and I think he fits
with them, I just don't love the move to sign
him as a starter, give him start of money and
kind of hope that he can figure it out he
gets into the rotation.

Speaker 1 (37:02):
Yeah, you kind of got two sides to like the
same coin. I feel like with them with the Max
Free deal, I almost felt when that happened that that
was the Yankees being like, we didn't get out that
we have to do something, and to kind of make
sure that to not necessarily control the narrative or whatever.
But it very much seemed that like, all right, just
give him a couple of extra years or whatever. Let's

(37:23):
get him in, get him over, get him in, so
he is going to be like that we've got We've
made a good signing. I felt that's maybe why the
Yankees probably offered a couple of years more the Homes.
I feel this is just what what they could do
now they have coming in charge of the Mets. He
can basically just be like, throw money at a problem,
and if he works, it works. If he doesn't, it

(37:43):
doesn't like he doesn't care. Like they're going to be
spending a ludicrous amounts of money compared to some of
the other teams when it comes to the luxury tax.

Speaker 2 (37:53):
But he doesn't care.

Speaker 1 (37:55):
Like they're already like a they're even still projected to
be spending less on their payroll than they did last year.
And if you think that includes the one Sodo contract. So, like,
Cohen doesn't care about how like money works.

Speaker 3 (38:09):
So I think it's just monopoly money to him.

Speaker 2 (38:13):
It is.

Speaker 1 (38:13):
It honestly is like and in some regards, it's kind
of how team ownership should be. That like, you're doing
this for not necessarily altruistic reasons of making the sport
and the team enjoyable for everybody. But it should be
a sport and it should be about the entertainment value
and not about like making money off it. So having
owners like Cohen gives you that kind of like interesting

(38:36):
side to it.

Speaker 3 (38:38):
We think about it that way.

Speaker 4 (38:39):
Thing. It's a bad free agent signing, right, you know,
you just just spend your money. You might as well
see what you get. Who cares if it doesn't work out?
It's not it's not our money.

Speaker 1 (38:48):
Yeah, And maybe that's something that in some regards that
that kind of first big birth of like sabermetrics or
analytics in baseball. Maybe got wrong that it was kind
of it really comest traded on these are bad deals
and kind of really killed that kind of that maybe
just that first base market and those kind of like

(39:09):
aging players where it's like, no, you really shouldn't be
offering this amount of money to them, you know what,
Like you want the player on your team, do it like.
It might not work sometimes, but hey, you're gonna at
least fix some most of you fans happier to start
off with. They'll be moaning about it maybe two or
three weeks down the line. But let's go with that. Okay,

(39:31):
let's go for another player award as we're talking about it,
what is the best one year deal that's out there?
I've called it the profile Award after his having a
one year deal of a very tiny amount of millions
and then suddenly now getting a three year deal from
the Braves one year later. What do you think of Ben,
Who's the best one year deal out there?

Speaker 2 (39:51):
Yeah?

Speaker 4 (39:51):
I've already said it a couple of times on this podcast.
I don't think as a such thing as a bad
one year deal. Right, if you're going to take a
flyer on a guy, see what he does if the
course of one season.

Speaker 3 (40:00):
Why not.

Speaker 4 (40:01):
So I think there's a ton of potential candidates for
this award. I've landed on two guys, a picture and
a hitter. I really like the Walker Buler.

Speaker 3 (40:12):
Deal with the Red Sox.

Speaker 4 (40:14):
I was concerned he was going to end up getting
a lot more than one year, just given he looked
really good again in October, obviously closed up the World Series,
kind of looked maybe not his old self, but a
version of himself that was dominant at times at the
very end of the season in the playoffs. And I
thought teams might look at that and suddenly think, Wow,

(40:35):
you know, we've got the old Walker Buller back. Let's
give him a three, four, five year deal and hope
that he can figure it all out. And obviously that
that market didn't materialize for him, and the Red Sox
were the beneficiaries. And I think at one year and
I think it's twenty one million dollars, that's a nice
move for them. Like you put him in rotation, see
what he can do if he has kind of figured
something out at the end of last year and turns

(40:56):
into that sort of maybe not elite starting picture, but
really strong middle of the rotation guy. That's a great
deal for them. They obviously need the depth in the
rotation the Red Sox do. And I think, considering yeah,
what we thought he might go for or what kind
of offers he might get, getting him on a one
year deal is great. You know, there's no real risk
in that injury wise, and no real risking that performance wise.

(41:17):
If he turns into a star, then what a huge win.
Another player I had was Clava Torres to the Detroit Tigers,
again a guy I thought would probably get a longer
deal than one year, just given his sort of track
record of being a strong sort of bat and offering
glove up the middle.

Speaker 3 (41:36):
For the Yankees.

Speaker 4 (41:37):
He's not exactly been out of the spotlight for the
last five years or so, but obviously, again in the market,
maybe didn't materialize for him, or he wanted to bet
on himself, But one year fifteen million for a guy
you can play good second base, has got contact skills,
has at various times shown power, can draw walks, can
I think, at this point in his career, probably be
a bit of a leader for a fairly young team
as well, I love.

Speaker 3 (41:57):
That move for Detroit. Again.

Speaker 4 (41:59):
You know, if he ends up being rubbish, then it's
not a huge detriment to them. I'm sure Tiger's fans
are scarred by up the middle signings after what's happened
with Havy, but I like that move for them.

Speaker 3 (42:11):
He's still only twenty eight years old.

Speaker 4 (42:13):
If he has a great year, he can go out
to the free market and find something better. But on
a one year deal. I love the upside they've got
from him. So yeah, those are my two one year
deals I love the most. But there are plenty of candidates.

Speaker 1 (42:25):
Yeah, I think for probably the first this evening, Glava
Torres was on my list as well, so I think
we both we both agreed with something which obviously is
a sign then that Torris is going to have an
awful season. So sorry, sorry Glabor, but yeah, no, I
generally think towards the end of the last season as well,
I understand why he's got a short contract. I think

(42:46):
the injuries they had missed nature which he's had in
his career, probably nobody was willing to put that put
that pen paper on the multi year deal.

Speaker 2 (42:54):
But I really do see.

Speaker 1 (42:55):
Him having a good season and continuing on next when
I put down it's another Tigers one for my Alex
calm down. I thought he was had a good a
little bit of his time towards the end of the
season last year at Cleveland, going back from injury. I
think he pitched really well and I was a little
bit disappointed that we didn't kind of get anything for him.

(43:16):
But then when the Tigers offered fifteen million of you,
that's just not something that the Guardians going to do.
So it's it's a little bit on the pricey end
for a one year deal, But I think the same
again where I can see him having a good season
and if the Tigers are going well, then he's going
to be a key part of them kind of getting
to the postseason. If it isn't going well for the

(43:38):
Tigers and they're not in contention, he could be an
easy little one to flip to get something to kind
of give yourself to go. The same way with Torres
is that if just for some reason things aren't quite
going the Tiger's way, they can flip these people off
and get something back off them for what for to
help them in the future seasons.

Speaker 2 (44:00):
So yeah, yeah, I.

Speaker 4 (44:01):
Take your word for it on COB I didn't get
a chance to watch him much last year, but I
know you were obviously seeing him a bit more as
a number of the guardians. I just cannot believe he's
still going. I feel like he's been around for ever.
Remember him as a sort of exciting young prospect on
the Rays, and it feels like that was fifteen years ago.

Speaker 3 (44:17):
Maybe it was fifteen years ago.

Speaker 2 (44:18):
Now.

Speaker 3 (44:19):
I know he's not exactly a spring chicken anymore, but
it is.

Speaker 4 (44:21):
Cool that he, despite a lot of injuries and inconsistency,
is still out there as a legit starting pitching option.
Obviously a very different picture now than he was back
when he first sort of sprang onto the scene, But yeah,
I'll be rooting for him this year, let's put it
that way.

Speaker 2 (44:38):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (44:38):
Well, he made his debut in twenty eleven, Ben, so yeah,
it probably was fifteen years ago that he was a
prospect for the Rais. So it's really when you kind
of think that, oh, I've been actually watching like baseball
for a long end of time to be like, oh,
there are people that I liked, the prospects that are
now like close to retiring out with like thirteen years
of major league service.

Speaker 3 (44:57):
God, we're getting old Russells is depressing.

Speaker 1 (45:01):
And of that, let's end on our final award of
the what I've called the Fisher Price Award or the
did you even Try Award? I think here I actually
have to go with the Seattle Mariners because we've actually
discussed that Oakland actually tried something. But for me, with
a decision that looks eminently winnable. The the fact that

(45:24):
the Southil Mariners have one free agent basically signing or
two three agent signings with donnov Silano and j Jaypeleenko,
I just so disappointed that they basically not kind of
like put the effort in here and really tried to
go for it, because they are probably right now still
neck and neck with the Tigers and the Astros. And

(45:48):
we know they said, what is it fifty two percent
or whatever, that's what fifty four percent, that's one of
the percentage of games she got to go win. So
we know it's their mentality and they haven't changed from it.
But it's still disappointing to see that they they had
not involved in any of these top players to just
kind of really push them a little bit further along
the way.

Speaker 3 (46:07):
Yeah. I agree.

Speaker 4 (46:10):
They're such a depressing team, aren't they, in that they
sort of promise so much and they have so much talent,
especially in the rotation, that you just want them to
do well, and they can just never seem to get
over the hump and truly compete. And yet nothing they've
done this winter has made you think that that's gonna
be any different going into this season. I had two
teams down for this, one of which you already mentioned

(46:33):
is the Padres, who there are extenuating circumstances there obviously
around why maybe they've been quiet this winter than we
would have expected.

Speaker 3 (46:40):
But I do still think it's disappointing.

Speaker 4 (46:43):
Considering how good they were at times last year, considering
they seemed to be the best rival to the Dodgers
in that division, that we haven't seen them go out
and be a bit more lively in the free agent
market and the trade market. I know they were in
a running for SOSAKEI and obviously just missed out, but
that's been somewhat disapoint to see. But the team that
really gets me for this one is the Saint Louis Cardinals.

Speaker 3 (47:04):
What are we doing? What are we doing here? Nothing?

Speaker 4 (47:09):
They were obviously bad last year, and I think we
maybe saw it coming a little bit because they didn't
do a whole lot last winter either, and they've done
absolutely nothing seemingly to try and reverse that trend. And
this isn't exactly a team or a fan base that
typically puts up with mediocrity, so I'm shocked, really to
see that they haven't gone out and made any major moves.
I know that they've been trying to trade Loan Arnado away,

(47:32):
which has been complicated by his no trade clause. Come
back to the Rockies, Nolan. We can fit you in
on days when Chris Bryant is injured. I know they've
also been looking in other parts of the trade market
and haven't necessarily been able to find suitors for other
players that they're presumably just trying to basically get off
the books at this point.

Speaker 3 (47:51):
But yeah, I thought they were going to do a
lot more than this.

Speaker 4 (47:54):
I guess they're seeing it as a rebuild now, if
we're being brutally honest, But they feel like a team
that don't rebuild right and that kind of, you know,
reset and find ways to get younger and to call
on their famous devil magic but I'm yeah, I'm somewhat
shocked that when other teams in that division, the Cubs
in particular, have been pretty active and gone out and

(48:16):
improved their roster, that the Cardinals have sat on their
hands and done basically nothing.

Speaker 2 (48:22):
Yeah, the Cardinals are a weird one.

Speaker 1 (48:23):
I feel that they don't I the ownership or the
front office don't know what to do with the situation
they're in because effectively, until the last couple of years,
they've never been in it before, Like they've always managed
to be our worse of five hundred team for the
best part of forty years. So they're now in an
unprecedented scenario and I don't know how. I don't think
they know how to deal with it, and they're being

(48:46):
hampered by some bad deals that didn't kind of see
them the way through they thought they would do with
with gold Schmid and Aaronadu and Aaronado seemingly just been like, yeah,
I'm not going to go there, and teams that he
may want to go to or all just going to
be like, yeah, no, we don't need you, like you're
still a solid like third baseman. The discussion of him

(49:08):
saying like, oh, I'm willing to go to first or whatever,
And I'm like, why you, I know you saying this
to keep your options open, but like, no team is
legitimately putting you at first because your defense is one
of the only good things you still have left. Your
hitting is what's gone to pop mate, not your defense.

Speaker 4 (49:25):
Yeah, as I look, it's sad for me to see
Nolan Arnado fade from what he wants was. But yeah,
it's the reality for him and for the Cardinals that
his bat has not been up to scratch of late,
and that competing teams don't particularly want to plug him
into their lineup at this point.

Speaker 3 (49:41):
So we'll see.

Speaker 4 (49:41):
Maybe they're still time for a deal to get done
on that front, or maybe he just returns and says
they see if he bounces back. But yeah, sad to
see to see his decline as a once great third
basement on both sides of the ball.

Speaker 1 (49:55):
Yes, I feel like I've been genuinely lucky that Michael
Branley kind of like retired semiwhere near the top when
he was he was my guy, the same way that
probably like Aaronado was for you, Ben, and I haven't
hadn't quite had to have the fall of grace for
one of my top players.

Speaker 3 (50:12):
Yeah, no one wants to say it.

Speaker 1 (50:14):
Okay, And that is the conclusion of today's episode. We
have handed out some awards based on the offseason, and
it will be preseason come the next time that we
will actually speak. We will be seeing footage of players
throwing in the backfields and spring training complexes talking about
being in the best shape of their life. We should

(50:35):
get a counter going, Ben maybe to be like the
best Shape of their Life tracker to see how many
players use that one, because it's going to be it's
gonna be gonna be big.

Speaker 4 (50:45):
But there is nothing better than the grainy photos taken
through wire fences at spring training of guys arriving in
the best shape of their life. This is truly the
best time of the year for baseball sickos like us.

Speaker 1 (50:58):
Indeed, and if you obviously want to listen to us,
obviously you can do so here on all the podcast
apps that you've done already over our YouTube channel now
where you'll be able to see mine and Ben's beautiful
faces while we've had this conversation, and obviously with the
chats that we had previously with like sax Scott.

Speaker 2 (51:16):
And with.

Speaker 1 (51:19):
A few Will Klein, who is coud be playing for
the Seattle Mariners, which I have just panned so.

Speaker 2 (51:26):
Obviously. Yeah.

Speaker 1 (51:28):
The website is out there, backflots and nerds dot com,
where there are some great articles coming out about some
of the teams from a British perspective. Great piece spout
from Tom Baker out there about Rhys Hoskins as well
as some great pieces from Jake around the Mariners.

Speaker 2 (51:43):
I would recommend you go and read.

Speaker 1 (51:45):
Those otherwise, as always, you could find us at batflots, Underscores,
nerds on x our Batflots and Nerds on any of
your other social media accounts. Been lovely to chat with you, Ben.
We'll be back with you shortly