Log in Register

Login to your account

Username *
Password *
Remember Me

Create an account

Fields marked with an asterisk (*) are required.
Name *
Username *
Password *
Verify password *
Email *
Verify email *

fb mb tw mb

Tuesday 27th Jun 2017

The slide rule has to go.

No, I am not talking about the sticks that nerds used as late as the 1960s to do complicated calculations - before the invention of the hand-held electronic calculator sent them the way of the buggy whip. These slide rules have already been relegated to museum pieces.

I am suggesting a similar fate is needed for Major League Baseball’s rule to protect catchers and other vulnerable defenders from dangerous base runners.

Don’t get me wrong. I am all for safety, and personally, I have no issue with the intent of the rule as it is written today.

The problem is that those charged with putting teeth behind it and dealing with its after-effects do not seem to want to do that. As a result, a rule exists that is worth less than the paper it is written on.

Of course, the current event that sparked this column occurred on Monday. Cubs first baseman Anthony Rizzo appeared to alter his path at the last moment, crashing into Padres catcher Austin Hedges and knocking him out of the game with a bruised right thigh. Rizzo was called out at the plate because the falling Hedges held onto the ball.

San Diego manager Andy Green called it “a cheap shot”. As one would expect, Rizzo defended his actions, calling it “a hard slide”.

Don’t worry, I am not going to go where 99 percent of analysts have gone with this story. You see, it is completely irrelevant whether or not you or I believe the play was legal. It doesn’t matter what fans in Chicago or San Diego think.

MLB’s judge and jury, the only person who has a vote on the matter, confirmed that Rizzo indeed committed a rules violation.

Joe Torre, who is in charge of discipline for MLB, readily admitted the slide was illegal. When the two spoke, the Hall of Famer said he told Rizzo the collision violated Rule 7.13. It states “a runner attempting to score may not deviate from his direct pathway to the plate in order to initiate contact with the catcher (or other player covering home plate)…”

Even so, Torre declined to punish Rizzo, saying there is "no precedent” to do so.

Uh, Joe, did you not know that anytime there is a new rule, there is never going to be a precedent – until someone steps up and establishes it. Really, could there have been a better time than this to do so?

If one wanted to send a clear message to baserunners to not drill catchers, this was the time.

Instead, the only “punishment” mandated for Rizzo taking out Hedges was to be called out – and since he was out, anyway, he gets off with zero penalty for a slide that was clearly illegal.

By making the decision to do nothing in what seems a very cut-and-dried case, Torre has essentially neutered the slide rule.

After all, who wouldn’t risk an out in return for taking out the opposing catcher?

If not for Rizzo, how could discipline for an illegal slide be administered to anyone? By ducking putting any teeth behind Rule 7.13, Torre has established his precedent. Any penalty that would be issued down the road to others would correctly be labeled as selective in nature.

It seems to me that it would be better to have no rule at all than give lip service to one that is in reality just wallpaper. Better yet, establish a clear penalty schedule for violations, taking the selectivity out of it entirely. Something needs to be done.

Brian Walton was the 2009 National League Tout Wars champion, scoring the most points in the league’s 18-year history. He also holds the all-time NL Tout single-season records for wins and saves. His work can also be found daily at TheCardinalNation.com. Follow Brian on Twitter @B_Walton.

Though we come from different walks of life, we are all busy people through the detailed fabric of our daily lives – with commitments to our families, friends, jobs and the like.

Here in the fantasy baseball world, there is no way around the fact that trading takes time and effort.

As a result, the two can - and often do - come into conflict.

While there have been many articles – here and elsewhere – about the ins and outs of trading, I do not recall having ever written about the time and effort angle – until now, that is.

As we are now partway through the 2017 season’s third month, it is definitely time to take stock of our fantasy roster needs.

But again, to pull off a deal means that someone is going to have to put the effort into analysis. Basic questions must be answered, such as - What are my team’s needs and what can I afford to give up to satisfy them? I consider that a “meets minimum” effort.

The better traders study the remainder of the league as well and target owners who look to have compatible needs. They float a personal feeler - whether via phone, email or text – identifying what they have to offer and suggesting potential and reasonable trade subjects.

In one of my leagues, a long-standing owner has been doing just the opposite. Over the last three weeks, this team owner has sent out an extended series of mass emails looking for a trade.

I see a number of learning opportunities from this owner’s approach, which will be detailed below.

Lesson #1: Customize your method of approaching peers. Ideally, in long-standing leagues, you may have begun long ago to file away information on how certain owners prefer to communicate and their likelihood of trading - or at least which channels they ignore. For example, if emails do not work, try to reach out via another, more personal approach.

Lesson #2: Avoid sending multiple broadcast emails to the entire league. One, I can deal with, but eight is crazy. In this case, it is clear the owner hoping to trade does not want to invest the time to try to identify a trade partner who may be more likely to trade. Instead, he expects someone else to do the necessary analysis. Not surprisingly, it seems no one took him up on it – over and over again.

Lesson #3: Don’t be vague. Never has the sender taken the time in any of his communications to even identify which league he is talking about. Many of us industry types play in a number of competitions in which we intersect. So, the first challenge here was trying to determine even where the owner was coming from. The only way to figure it out was to sift through the email distribution list looking for unique names. This is another example of how the initiating owner hurt his own chances of finding a trade partner by wasting the time of the other 11 owners – just to be able to interpret his email. With just a little more care and consideration, this could have been very easily avoided.

Lesson #4: Don’t beat a dead horse. If you don’t get a response, try something else. This particular owner has sent out eight emails since May 19, seeking essentially the same trade – his hitter for your pitcher. After a few tries, this moved from being mildly amusing firmly into the annoying stage, with joking comments that could rub some others – all experienced industry analysts – the wrong way.

The full text of the eight emails follow, with only the identifying details altered.

Email #1 May 19: “Subject: Offering Trade”
“Will deal ‘Mr. X’ for very good starter..Operators are standing by”
As a point of background, “Mr. X” is a former MVP who has fallen upon rougher times the last few seasons, dropping from an elite performer to a league-average one.

#2 May 26: “2nd-year guy or Mr. X or anyone else for Good Starter”
The owner expanded the scope of available players to include an offensive performer who is in his second full season of play. “2nd-year guy” is a good enough hitter, but not of All-Star caliber.

#3 May 27: “Ok Im upping the ante ‘Good 3bman’ for a good good starter + Need a MI for position mix to move (another player) to 3rd”
He only waited 27 hours before his next communication. This third baseman is having a career year, but has not been an All-Star yet. This could be the season.

However, the owner narrowed his scope of potential trade partners by adding the requirement of a middle infielder on top of his top starting pitcher need. This is an –only league, so the waiver wire rarely has hitters available with more than 10 at-bats the prior week – and those players are quickly scooped up.

#4 May 27 (just three minutes after note #3): “867-5309 if easier”
OK, at least he is willing to take phone calls – and offered up his phone number. But again, you have to call HIM.

#5 June 5: “Looking to trade offense for a Good Starting pitcher”
At this point, the trade proposal has gone entirely generic – as he is no longer mentioning names.

#6 June 5 (nine hours later): “I will be sending a very good offensive player to another team by Friday Hurry if you want him!!”
Now, in his sixth email, the seller is trying a new tactic – suggesting he has at least one offer on the table while trying to solicit a higher bid. Does anyone really believe this? The tone gives more of the feel of a late-night TV infomercial than a serious trade communication to industry peers.

#7 June 6: (no text, just a copy of the #6 June 5 email re-sent)
OK, now the guy is getting plain annoying. Why doesn’t he understand that we all saw his other two emails within the last 24 hours, as well as the four prior to that? Our missing his emails is not why he is receiving no response.

#8 June 11: “Today.,is the day Trading Offense U nmae the player for GOOD SP Thanks”
June 11 was Sunday, but the way. The supposed Friday deadline was already two days past.

This email is pasted verbatim. You can tell just from reading it the amount of effort being put into engineering a trade. Why work on a specific swap when you can grind your peers with the same generic message over and over? Maybe he believes that someone will give in and make a deal with him - just to stop his emails.

In fact, a reply was finally received. It came from another owner, who copied the entire league in his sarcastic comment following email #8: “The suspense is killing us.”

It is not my intent to call anyone out, as many of us may know someone like this. Instead, I am offering this example as what not to do – if you want to get a trade done, that is.

Brian Walton was the 2009 National League Tout Wars champion, scoring the most points in the league’s 18-year history. He also holds the all-time NL Tout single-season records for wins and saves. His work can also be found daily at TheCardinalNation.com and thecardinalnationblog.com. Follow Brian on Twitter @B_Walton.

Earlier this week during the daily Scout Fantasy Show from 7:00 to 9:00 a.m. ET on SiriusXM Fantasy, hosts Adam Ronis and Dr. Roto were discussing in-season rules changes.

Specifically, the question was posed as to whether league commissioners should be allowed to alter rules during the season. When the topic was opened up to Twitter exchanges, the modifier was added, “or is that too shady?”

Here is my take. No commissioner of any league should have the power to enact rules changes on his/her own at any time. After all, they are in charge of regulating leagues, not serving as dictator.

In 99.9 percent of leagues, the commissioner is also a competitor. From this is where the “shady” comment comes. Whether it could be proven that a proposed rule change would actually benefit a particular owner or not is immaterial. The commish needs to remain completely impartial at all times – and that includes perception.

If your commissioner disagrees with that, you need to find a different league in which to compete.

On Twitter, one follower, CheckerBDMafia, left the door open, based on the situation.

“Generally no, but if a mistake was made&vote =yes. Had waiver wire set wrong. Was allowing worst team to get every player instead of rolling,” he tweeted.

I consider this neither a rules change nor an exception. This action is simply fixing a problem caused by a human error. Hopefully, this league’s correct waiver rules were spelled out in the league’s constitution.

Commenter Mike_Santulli has been there and done that – and wished he hadn’t.

“I've done that as Commissioner looking to improve the league but only caused problems. Vote on a change for next season,” Santulli tweeted.

Mike has it exactly right – the second time. The ideal timeframe in which to consider a rules change for next year is this year, when the problem situation is fresh in everyone’s mind. However, even if passed now, it has to go into effect next season – in every case.

A league in which “dsfsoxfan” is a member has already made an in-season change here in 2017. I disagree with it for philosophical reasons, but see why it was done.

“Just had one this year with the DL spots in a dyno league. Expanded the DL due to the massive number of DL's,” he tweeted.

With the change of the minimum MLB disabled list stay from 15 days to 10 this season, 25-man roster churn has intensified. According to ESPN data from March 31 through May 14, MLB DL stays are up 16.2 percent in 2017 compared to 2016. (If you click on the link, you can also read about how at least one MLB club is manipulating the new rule to essentially play with a 26-man roster.)

Still, the only way I would support what dfssoxfan’s league did is if the in-season vote was a true 100 percent in favor of change. And in how many leagues would every single owner agree on anything?

To be honest, I would actually first try to talk them out of having a finite number of DL spots in the first place. I believe any limit, which by definition is arbitrary, unfairly penalizes team owners with bad luck. But that is a topic for another day.

I agree with my final quoted commenter, TheFFLCommish - I think.

“If a loophole is found, it should be closed. All leagues should have a constitution and the commish should have a "best for league" mindset,” he tweeted.

Let’s break this remark down into its three components.

Yes, all leagues should have a constitution – no exceptions. If one is needed, you can find scores of examples on the internet. Pick one as a base and identify the changes you need. While you are at it, make sure your rules also clarify whether the support of a simple majority of owners is required to enact a rule change or if a higher percent is desired.

Yes, every commissioner should have a mindset to do what is best for the league, but let’s get real. No commish is perfect. Complicating matters is the reality that they are league competitors, too. The very best place to be in is to have every situation already covered in the rules. That way, the commissioner is like the Maytag repairman – all dressed up with no place to go.

On the other hand, if your commissioner is having to make a lot of hands-on decisions during the season, it tells me your league constitution is weak.

To come full circle, TheFFLCommish’s first comment is the one about which I am unsure. Loopholes do need to be closed - but just make sure you enact the change for next year.

(Listen to @ScoutFantasy from 7-9 a.m. ET on @SiriusXMFantasy.)

Brian Walton was the 2009 National League Tout Wars champion, scoring the most points in the league’s 18-year history. He also holds the all-time NL Tout single-season records for wins and saves. His work can also be found daily at TheCardinalNation.com and thecardinalnationblog.com. Follow Brian on Twitter @B_Walton.

Major League Baseball’s adjustment to the disabled list, reducing the minimum stay from 15 days to 10 for 2017, is leading to more players being shelved than ever before. According to MLB data, during April, the total of 10-day DL moves this season was 177, compared to 149 15-day DL stints a year ago.

Is it a good thing or bad?

Many MLB managers seem to like it. In an AP story dated May 8, 10-day DL backers quoted include Giants skipper Bruce Bochy and Reds manager Bryan Price, citing positive benefits for player and team.

Interestingly, Bochy’s toughest competitor, the Los Angeles Dodgers, have been accused by some of gaming the new rule to juggle their seven-man rotation. Critics believe the Dodgers are liberally applying the 10-day DL to skip a rotation turn for selected pitchers to give them additional rest, while creating phantom injuries as justification, if necessary. Under the prior rules, a pitcher would have to miss at least two starts over a 15-day period out.

For their part, the Dodgers are unapologetic, welcoming MLB scrutiny while clearly leveraging the new rule to their advantage.

But what does this increased traffic on and off disabled lists mean to fantasy owners in 2017?

The level of interest may vary simply based on the league format, as all DL stays are clearly not created equal.

Some leagues feature disabled lists of a finite size, which may require careful roster balancing, while others have unlimited DL usage. Certain leagues allow in-week moves of a disabled player out of the lineup and a replacement in – if a legal substitute is among that owner’s reserves, while other leagues prohibit any mid-week changes.

I compete in leagues of all those flavors and more. While I have my opinions, I wanted to lead with the views of three friends, who also happen to play in and administer leagues in which I compete.

They are Fantasy Sports Writers Association Hall of Famer Ron Shandler of ronshandler.com, USA TODAY Sports' Senior Fantasy Editor Steve Gardner and Masterball’s own Todd Zola.

Here are answers to four questions posed to all three analysts, with my remarks following.

1) In standard redraft leagues, do you believe in fixed numbers of DL spots, having none or unlimited use and why?

Zola: “I'll say unlimited, but I don't have a strong preference. We're all playing with the same inventory; tell me what the rule is and I'll plan accordingly. That said, I've played in very few leagues with a set number or reserves, all of them shallow mixed leagues where the available pool is deep so tossing back an injured player doesn't hurt as much.”

Shandler: “I have always been a proponent of unlimited DL spots. You get hurt enough by losing a player but I see no point in doubling the pain by forcing an owner to pick and choose which hurt players he can keep.”

Gardner: “I haven’t really thought about restricting the number of DL spots in LABR, simply because we’ve always had an unlimited DL and most of the leagues I’m in have an unlimited DL as well.”

Walton: “Perhaps the restricted-size DL league subset is small. I hope so, as I agree with Ron. Don’t kick owners when they are down.”

2) Has your thinking on the DL matter evolved over time? Why or why not?

Shandler: “Nope. Pretty much always felt this way. There are enough things in this game that are out of our control. Don't handicap our ability to manage our roster even more.”

Zola: “My thinking really hasn't evolved, primarily due to the limited exposure to DL limits. That is, I have very little hands-on experience to shape my thinking.”

Gardner: “My feelings on the DL issue have evolved somewhat over the years, and not just because of the new 10-day DL. The one change that makes more and more sense to me is capping the number of DL spots in deep AL- or NL-only leagues because the waiver wire is so incredibly thin, especially among hitters. Forcing owners to make the tough decisions – whether to wait on an injured player or cut him because a roster spot is needed immediately – is probably a better test of managing ability than just being able to stash all injured players on the DL until they return.

“The DL shouldn’t be a place to stockpile players just to keep them away from opponents. However, I’m sympathetic to the owners who just have horrible luck during the season and lose a number of their best players to injury. It does seem like a pretty heavy penalty to be forced to cut a $20-$30 player because all DL slots are already taken.”

Walton: “Steve comes at this from an interesting angle. Many weeks in AL- and NL-only leagues, the busiest free agent hitter might have logged just 10 or 12 at-bats the prior week. Slim pickings, indeed.

“Having said that, though, I admit that I have targeted injured players in drafts solely for the purposes of stashing them on the unlimited-sized DL until ready.”

3) In the leagues you administer, have you seen any impact of the 10 vs. 15-day MLB DL this year? If so, what?

Zola: “Not really. I think the 10 vs. 15 argument is overblown. Yeah, the Dodgers are playing with a 26-man roster, but other than that, there's just a handful of players put on the 10-day DL staying fewer than 15 days.”

Shandler: “More players are on the DL but it is not clear what percentage of them would still have gone on a 15-day DL. There have been some cases when the timing of the MLB DL move was such that it came too late to place a player on the fantasy DL but the 10 days would end too early to justify putting the player on the DL during the second week when he could return to action that week. It seems to require more owner insight into the injury prognosis and what the MLB team is planning to do. Not easy.”

Gardner: “There seems to be a renewed interest in the disabled list with MLB teams liberally using the new 10-day DL. It seems to have resulted in more fantasy owners having to guess whether or not their players will be back when they’re eligible, when previously there seemed to be enough time to feel more confident about a player’s status when 15-day stint was over.

“I think that’s what’s causing the most consternation among fantasy owners, not the fact that more players are going on the DL. In the past, I’d bet a lot of the same players would remain on an MLB team’s active roster in case they recovered sooner than expected.”

Walton: “Ron and Steve hit on the roster management issues for fantasy owners trying to gauge what an injured player’s situation really is. I would like to give fantasy league owners increased flexibility in this more challenging environment.”

4) If there has been any impact, is it enough to consider future rules changes in your leagues?

Gardner: “I’m definitely not in favor of changing the rules during the season. But I’ll probably poll LABR owners this offseason about limiting the number of DL spots in the future. Maybe a maximum of 3-5??

Shandler: “I've gotten into some spirited discussion on my site with readers in leagues with limited DL spots. But opening up that rule seems to resolve all those issues.”

Zola: “No -- and I'd argue against any changes based on this one season. As suggested, this is a goofy year with respect to injuries. It's not the 10-day DL - more players are getting hurt. I don't like to make any changes based on one season which should prove to be a blip.

“The most important aspect of the fantasy DL is for it to be separate than the reserve list. It's already bad enough you have an injured player, it's worse if you have to decide whether to keep the player, taking up a reserve spot or release him. In essence, the rich get richer. Not only does a team devoid of injuries have their active roster at full strength, they have stronger reserves, or perhaps the ability to stash a minor league prospect.

“If I could change one rule with the NFBC, it would be adding a separate DL to the 7-man reserve, especially because the NFBC allows Friday activation for hitters,” he said.

Walton: “When all is said and done, we have differing priorities. Ron remains in favor of unlimited DL sizes, while Steve is considering limiting them in –only leagues, and Todd wants to separate injured and reserve players. In my leagues, I may push for mid-week roster change capability in 2018 and beyond to help owners better navigate through the choppier DL waters.”

No matter how you feel about the DL subject personally, it is always a good idea to take your league’s temperature throughout the season and be ready to engage your peers on potential changes for next season.

In closing, I would like to thank Ron Shandler, Steve Gardner and Todd Zola for participating in this discussion.

 

Brian Walton was the 2009 National League Tout Wars champion, scoring the most points in the league’s 18-year history. He also holds the all-time NL Tout single-season records for wins and saves. His work can also be found daily at TheCardinalNation.com and thecardinalnationblog.com. Follow Brian on Twitter @B_Walton.

As introduced last week, we are taking a look at the early 2017 performances of the rookie-eligible players selected on draft day in National League LABR. These players were rostered during the first week of spring training contests, so much has occurred since then – some good and some bad.

In Part 1, I highlighted 21 players, but only made it halfway through the 12-team NL LABR league’s initial rosters. Here, we will pick up the rest, starting with those who were offered up for bidding in the main auction draft, followed by the reserves.

Drafted

Austin Barnes, C, Dodgers – Steve Gardner, USA TODAY, $1
Though the former Miami prospect remains a reserve, his 52 plate appearances here in 2017 is already a new career high. Barnes also has a career-best .511 slugging percentage with two-thirds of his hits having gone for extra bases. In a two-catcher NL-only league of 12 teams, simple math tells us at least nine backup catchers will have to be active at any point in time. Barnes looks like he was a good end-game choice.

Amed Rosario, SS, Mets – Gardner, $1
As the infield injuries mount, the most recent being the move of Asdrubal Cabrera to the disabled list, the questions at Citi Field increase. When will Rosario be promoted from Triple-A Las Vegas? Well, the Mets say he is not ready, sliding Jose Reyes over to short and using Cabrera’s roster spot on a reliever. Still, expect Rosario to make his MLB debut after his Super Two risk passes, likely by mid-season.

Hunter Renfroe, OF, San Diego – Derek Van Riper, Rotowire, $11
The outfielder was handled a bit oddly last September, with a guessing game as to whether or not he would be added to the Padres roster. Despite just getting 35 MLB at-bats from the 21st on, Renfroe’s 14 RBI in 11 games and impressive minor league pedigree made him a popular pick in drafts this spring. It has been tough sledding in 2017, however, as he is batting just .218 with a 27.2 percent strikeout rate. On the positive side, the 25-year old has seven home runs and 17 RBI through 40 games.

Austin Meadows, OF, Pittsburgh – Van Riper, $1
Meadows’ off-season outlook seemed to be tied to the on-and-off trading saga that ended with Andrew McCutchen remaining with the Pirates. Yet when center fielder Starling Marte went down last month, it was not Meadows who received the call. To be fair, it was not warranted. Meadows’ poor results at Triple-A to date, including a .221 batting average in 295 plate appearances over this year and last, suggests more development time is needed.

Josh Hader, SP, Milwaukee – Doug Dennis, BaseballHQ, $4
Milwaukee’s top mound prospect is progressing at Colorado Springs, not an easy place to pitch. On the positive side, the 23-year old has 36 strikeouts in 40 2/3 innings, but the 24 walks and nine home runs yielded have to be addressed before Hader will be deemed ready for the bigs.

Josh Bell, 1B, Pittsburgh - Dalton Del Don, Yahoo Sports, $19
Last season, Bell was just two at-bats short (128 of 130) of losing his rookie eligibility. What we have seen in 2017 in comparison to his 2016 debut is a lower batting average and higher strikeout rate, but more power. He will need to step up his play to provide a solid return on that $19 investment, which is certainly quite possible.

Reserves

Rio Ruiz, 3B, Atlanta – Van Riper
With only struggling Adonis Garcia ahead of Ruiz, Atlanta’s starting third sacker’s move to the disabled list with an Achilles injury last week could have opened the door for the prospect, but that did not happen. Instead, Johan Camargo was called up to sit behind Jace Peterson, who is moving over from second. Ruiz’ struggles against left-handed pitching is what appears to be the holdback, despite him swinging a hot bat overall at Triple-A. My guess is that if this was later in the season, we would see Ruiz now.

Amir Garrett, SP, Cincinnati – Dennis
Doug Dennis lives in the Queen City and as such, is to be trusted on his choice of Reds. After being taken in NL LABR, Garrett impressed in spring camp and made the rotation to open the season. After a month of being bombed, though, the 25-year old was returned to Triple-A, but he will be back to face the Cubs on Thursday. Despite the bumps in the road, Garrett remains one of Cincinnati’s best five starting options.

Jeff Hoffman, SP, Colorado – Derek Carty
The Rockies’ top take in the Troy Tulowitzki trade has yet to make his mark. Hoffman did not make the team this spring and was passed over when Jon Gray was injured. Still, the right-hander was called up to make a spot start last week and performed credibly against the Dodgers at home (three runs in 5 1/3 innings). When all is said and done, however, any pitcher who makes half of his starts at altitude will be a “rocky” choice. Add to that the fact that LABR does not allow streaming of pitchers and it is a challenge to see 2017 value for Hoffman in this league.

Brock Stewart, SP, Dodgers – Carty
Injuries caused the 25-year old to be pressed to the majors early, as he made five starts for the Dodgers last season. However, a lingering shoulder injury that surfaced this spring has kept Stewart on the disabled list all season to date. There is no clear return date for the talented lefty.

Grant Dayton, RP, Dodgers – Carty
Well, there is quite a pattern here, with Derek Carty having taken three NL West pitchers among his reserves. Unlike the other two above, Dayton is a lefty reliever who was coming off a strong 2016 debut. After making the club this spring and pitching well early, the 29-year old suffered an intercostal strain last month. Struggling following his return, Dayton was sent down to Triple-A earlier this week.

Tyler Beede, SP, San Francisco – Del Don
The 23-year old reported to camp as one of the combatants for the fifth starter job, but not only did not make the Giants, he was also passed over when Madison Bumgarner had his unfortunate dirt bike-related injury. Through 36 2/3 Triple-A innings this season, Beede has an uninspiring 26 strikeouts to 14 walks and a decent 3.68 ERA. His time will surely come soon enough.

Socrates Brito, OF, Arizona – Del Don
The last profiled player has undoubtedly the worst luck. After stints with the Diamondbacks the last two seasons, Brito seemed positioned to play a greater role in 2017, likely as the fourth outfielder. However, early in spring training, the 24-year old suffered what sounds to be a very painful injury – an “open dislocation” of his left ring finger. Surgery and a move to the 60-day disabled list followed. Perhaps there will still be time for Brito to contribute in the second half.

Brian Walton was the 2009 National League Tout Wars champion, scoring the most points in the league’s 18-year history. He also holds the all-time NL Tout single-season records for wins and saves. His work can also be found daily at TheCardinalNation.com and thecardinalnationblog.com. Follow Brian on Twitter @B_Walton.

Latest Tweets

ToutWars 420x318911

 

LABRLOGO

xfl

toutwarslogo-new

Our Authors