WEBVTT - Cleaning Up: Prospect Breakdowns and Expectations + Jacob deGrom, Corbin Burnes, and More! (Ep. 1018) 0:00:05.320 --> 0:00:08.480 What's up, friends, and welcome into Fantasy Pros MLB. This 0:00:09.360 --> 0:00:12.760 is cleaning up a little extra podcast for your fantasy 0:00:13.200 --> 0:00:16.080 baseball repertoire. We have been out for a little bit, 0:00:16.480 --> 0:00:18.959 but Joe Rico and I we're in our brand new 0:00:19.079 --> 0:00:22.120 time over on the Fantasy Pros Discord five pm Eastern 0:00:22.520 --> 0:00:24.560 on Monday. That is where the show has moved to. 0:00:25.040 --> 0:00:27.200 We are here to gauge with you. We got a 0:00:27.200 --> 0:00:29.680 couple of topics we're gonna hit. Kind of a shorter hitting, 0:00:29.680 --> 0:00:33.080 easy podcast, but also open to the community where when 0:00:33.080 --> 0:00:35.800 we are on Discord, people can come and hang out. 0:00:35.800 --> 0:00:38.120 They can drop questions, they can raise their hand, they 0:00:38.120 --> 0:00:40.519 can be a part of the show. You yes, you 0:00:41.040 --> 0:00:43.240 could be a part of the show. All you gotta 0:00:43.280 --> 0:00:46.560 do is join our Fantasy Pros Discord community at Fantasypros 0:00:46.600 --> 0:00:50.479 dot com, slash chat chat with other fans, get access 0:00:50.520 --> 0:00:54.040 to exclusive amas that wind up on our podcast feed, 0:00:54.440 --> 0:00:56.680 and then, as mentioned, you're cana hang out with Joe 0:00:56.720 --> 0:00:59.160 and I Monday's at five pm Eastern. 0:00:59.160 --> 0:01:01.800 Come and get your questions answered and be on the show. 0:01:01.880 --> 0:01:07.360 Fantasypros dot Com slash Chat. Mister Joe Alrico, we did 0:01:07.400 --> 0:01:08.920 a couple of shows together last week. 0:01:09.080 --> 0:01:09.760 Right back at it. 0:01:09.800 --> 0:01:12.640 How are you, buddy, I'm good man. It's going to 0:01:12.640 --> 0:01:14.880 be back up to one hundred percent. Apologies to the 0:01:14.920 --> 0:01:17.080 listeners for missing the last couple of weeks and switching 0:01:17.120 --> 0:01:20.120 things up on them, but hopefully outside of next week 0:01:20.160 --> 0:01:21.720 we should be able to keep this going the rest 0:01:21.760 --> 0:01:23.360 of the season. I'm excited to talk some ball with you, 0:01:23.400 --> 0:01:23.759 my friend. 0:01:23.880 --> 0:01:25.720 Yeah, we get some good short hitting stuff here in 0:01:25.720 --> 0:01:27.600 an opportunity for anybody. I mean, you know, we have 0:01:27.680 --> 0:01:30.640 created a bunch of fun opportunities for people to interact. 0:01:30.959 --> 0:01:34.680 Monday through Friday, twelve pm Eastern, Leading Off on Twitch, 0:01:35.280 --> 0:01:39.200 we do that. We get some interaction Wednesdays on YouTube 0:01:39.200 --> 0:01:40.440 at four pm Eastern. 0:01:41.080 --> 0:01:41.840 Piece of p and I. 0:01:41.840 --> 0:01:45.280 Are live for a full hour, just straight answering questions, 0:01:45.760 --> 0:01:48.600 and this show kind of can serve as another similar 0:01:48.680 --> 0:01:50.680 piece of that. If it doesn't happen on leading off 0:01:50.720 --> 0:01:53.480 or whatever, you guys can jump in here and you 0:01:53.520 --> 0:01:55.480 can get some of your questions answered and that can 0:01:55.520 --> 0:01:57.880 help dictate the show. But I got a couple offerings. 0:01:57.880 --> 0:02:00.800 We are going to start this show off with Joe Rico, 0:02:00.840 --> 0:02:03.880 and the first one is a little prospectee type of thing. 0:02:03.920 --> 0:02:05.720 We got a couple little prospect he ones. But you'll 0:02:05.760 --> 0:02:08.720 be able to handle this fine, because Matt Shaw being 0:02:08.720 --> 0:02:12.239 called back up to the majors, And I think this 0:02:12.320 --> 0:02:15.760 is putting a big question into Moisist Ballisterio's value moving 0:02:15.800 --> 0:02:19.480 forward unless they cut bait on A Kelly or an 0:02:19.480 --> 0:02:22.800 a Maya, because Bush is the first baseman. Shaw's gonna 0:02:22.800 --> 0:02:25.959 come back and play third, presumably, and that puts a 0:02:26.040 --> 0:02:29.400 question into Ballisteros. So Ballisteros isn't really even kind of 0:02:29.400 --> 0:02:32.840 the question here. But my curiousness first is what is 0:02:32.880 --> 0:02:35.880 your valuation on Matt Shaw? Is he a must add player? 0:02:35.960 --> 0:02:38.200 After his struggles, he went back to the miners, got 0:02:38.240 --> 0:02:42.120 back pretty good. Is he a must add in fantasy formats? 0:02:43.880 --> 0:02:46.040 I think in the majority of leagues I would take 0:02:46.080 --> 0:02:47.799 a chance on him. If you're playing in one of 0:02:47.840 --> 0:02:50.840 those super shallow ten team leagues, maybe not. 0:02:50.960 --> 0:02:51.400 I don't know that. 0:02:51.440 --> 0:02:54.240 I'd say he's a top ten third baseman. But in 0:02:54.280 --> 0:02:57.880 the minors, twenty four games, six homers, five steals, he's 0:02:57.919 --> 0:03:00.960 walking more than he's striking out, only a ten percent strikeout, right, Like, 0:03:00.960 --> 0:03:03.400 he's done some really good stuff, and that lineup is 0:03:03.560 --> 0:03:06.120 very good in Chicago. The only problem there is that 0:03:06.160 --> 0:03:07.600 he'll be at the bottom of it. Now you can 0:03:07.680 --> 0:03:09.320 argue like it's going to turn over to the top 0:03:09.360 --> 0:03:10.880 of the order and he should be on base, should 0:03:10.880 --> 0:03:11.880 be able to score some runs. 0:03:12.480 --> 0:03:14.440 I'd like him. I think in twelve teamers and deeper, 0:03:14.480 --> 0:03:15.320 i'd be picking them up. 0:03:15.800 --> 0:03:19.160 I think I agree with you on that the must 0:03:19.320 --> 0:03:22.080 add kind of adage. I think it's overplayed a little 0:03:22.080 --> 0:03:25.360 bit sometimes, but I think he falls into that territory, 0:03:25.440 --> 0:03:27.840 like there's a lot of offensive upside, especially if he 0:03:27.880 --> 0:03:30.960 fixed what he needed to, you know. I mean, this 0:03:31.000 --> 0:03:33.400 team is going to be highly competitive. The only negative 0:03:33.919 --> 0:03:35.400 is that maybe he's hitting a little bit lower in 0:03:35.440 --> 0:03:36.240 the lineup. 0:03:36.280 --> 0:03:37.080 At the end of the day. 0:03:37.320 --> 0:03:39.240 So let me ask you this, though we both agree, 0:03:40.440 --> 0:03:45.240 Matt Shaw or Nick Kurtz, who would you want rest 0:03:45.240 --> 0:03:45.680 of season? 0:03:47.480 --> 0:03:48.160 A good question. 0:03:48.280 --> 0:03:51.720 I think there's probably not a huge difference in value overall, 0:03:51.880 --> 0:03:55.520 but I would probably slightly lean towards Shaw. A lot 0:03:55.520 --> 0:03:57.280 of times you see guys struggle a little bit, they 0:03:57.360 --> 0:03:59.480 go back down, and then once they get called up 0:03:59.480 --> 0:04:01.480 for a second, sometimes a third time, that's when it 0:04:01.520 --> 0:04:02.400 really clicks for them. 0:04:02.840 --> 0:04:03.400 With Kurtz. 0:04:03.440 --> 0:04:05.120 I mean, you know, we were hanging our hat on 0:04:05.160 --> 0:04:07.200 the batting average. I heard you and Joe talking about 0:04:07.200 --> 0:04:10.360 this earlier. It's down to two nineteen with the strikeouts 0:04:10.360 --> 0:04:11.680 where they are for Kurtz. 0:04:11.880 --> 0:04:13.080 I think if the. 0:04:13.000 --> 0:04:14.960 Option is one or the other at this point, I'd 0:04:15.000 --> 0:04:16.400 be okay to drop Kurts for Shaw. 0:04:18.000 --> 0:04:20.920 I think I'm a I think I'm a Kurtz guy 0:04:20.960 --> 0:04:22.599 on this one. The only thing is if you're chasing 0:04:22.680 --> 0:04:25.640 chasing the stolen bases, it's a little bit better on 0:04:25.680 --> 0:04:28.400 the Matt Shaw side, assuming he like kind of kicks 0:04:28.440 --> 0:04:31.000 it back, But I think Kurts is gonna ultimately hit 0:04:31.080 --> 0:04:34.720 higher in the lineup. It's a great ballpark factor. There 0:04:34.800 --> 0:04:38.080 seem to be some ulterior options that the Cubs have. 0:04:38.400 --> 0:04:39.800 I think it's a tough one. I'd be curious to 0:04:39.880 --> 0:04:41.960 where people are at on that. You can drop it 0:04:42.000 --> 0:04:45.400 on the podcast comments that we have and anybody hanging 0:04:45.440 --> 0:04:49.880 in the live is Kurts or Matt Shaw? Rest of season? 0:04:50.320 --> 0:04:51.400 Which one would. 0:04:51.200 --> 0:04:51.680 You rather have? 0:04:52.120 --> 0:04:58.600 Question number two is Corbyn Burns back. This is a 0:04:58.720 --> 0:05:02.279 very important one, especially to me, Joey, and also not 0:05:02.520 --> 0:05:05.120 just because I have been pretty loudly on the Corbyn 0:05:05.200 --> 0:05:08.880 burn Well, I think one of my arguments was he 0:05:09.000 --> 0:05:11.320 is one of the few players that has almost no 0:05:11.560 --> 0:05:14.520 data that is giving me a case to tell you 0:05:14.560 --> 0:05:16.920 that he's going to bounce back. But I think he'll 0:05:16.960 --> 0:05:20.920 bounce back, and that kind of has happened. His villo 0:05:21.000 --> 0:05:23.279 had been down all season his last two starts. After 0:05:23.320 --> 0:05:26.039 he had that rest, villa was back up around a 0:05:26.040 --> 0:05:29.039 mile ish per hour. He's sporting a two five six ERA, 0:05:29.160 --> 0:05:31.719 which looks great, but he's got a really high whip 0:05:31.800 --> 0:05:35.280 and expected ERA that's pretty dang high. There's some negatives, 0:05:35.320 --> 0:05:39.080 but a lot of the overarching negatives are masked because 0:05:39.080 --> 0:05:42.440 his last two starts he's been absolutely dominant. He's gone 0:05:44.320 --> 0:05:46.400 nowhere and runs over his last two I believe it's 0:05:46.480 --> 0:05:49.440 seven and six. The strikeouts are way up. So the 0:05:49.520 --> 0:05:51.719 question is Corbyn burns back to being like a top 0:05:51.800 --> 0:05:52.560 ten sp. 0:05:54.480 --> 0:05:57.760 I wouldn't go quite that far, but he's definitely quelled 0:05:57.760 --> 0:06:00.160 some of my worries that I had, even just as 0:06:00.160 --> 0:06:02.440 recently as a couple of weeks ago. You know, last 0:06:02.440 --> 0:06:05.120 season he had a two ninety two ERA and a 0:06:05.200 --> 0:06:07.440 lot of the metrics weren't that great. You know, he 0:06:07.480 --> 0:06:10.440 outperformed a lot of the expected eras and phips of 0:06:10.440 --> 0:06:10.880 the world. 0:06:11.160 --> 0:06:13.400 Strikeout rate was down, and he still did well. 0:06:13.400 --> 0:06:14.920 And I think Burns is one of those guys who 0:06:14.960 --> 0:06:17.680 can make a lot of adjustments. He's still elite in 0:06:17.720 --> 0:06:20.120 the sense of, I mean, I'm going to butcher the 0:06:20.120 --> 0:06:21.839 wording of this year. I think he is elite, but 0:06:21.920 --> 0:06:24.599 he's not quite in that top ten sp one range. 0:06:24.600 --> 0:06:26.599 I think he's just a really smart pitcher. And even 0:06:26.600 --> 0:06:28.680 if he's not, you know, racking up the strikeouts like 0:06:28.680 --> 0:06:31.440 this year's pretty pedestrian twenty two percent strikeout right, the 0:06:31.520 --> 0:06:34.039 walks throughout the season have been awful eleven percent. 0:06:34.080 --> 0:06:34.800 But he's still. 0:06:34.560 --> 0:06:37.599 Somebody that it just hard to be that that worried about. 0:06:38.120 --> 0:06:40.800 I wouldn't be rushing out to try and trade a 0:06:40.839 --> 0:06:42.600 bunch for him, but I think if you have him, 0:06:42.640 --> 0:06:44.520 he's not somebody that I'd be trying to sell. Like 0:06:44.760 --> 0:06:46.440 as of a few weeks ago, I was more in 0:06:46.440 --> 0:06:48.200 the camp of I'd be looking to get out from 0:06:48.279 --> 0:06:50.359 under him if you can get an sp one. But 0:06:50.480 --> 0:06:53.320 even with the data still not being that great, I 0:06:53.360 --> 0:06:56.440 don't think I'm all that concerned about Burns. Good team context, 0:06:56.520 --> 0:06:58.280 He's gonna win a lot of games. I think we'll 0:06:58.279 --> 0:07:01.000 still see an era, even if it's not quite this low. 0:07:01.240 --> 0:07:04.039 I think it'll be somewhere at worst like three, four, 0:07:04.200 --> 0:07:06.640 three five. I still think he's very good. I just 0:07:06.680 --> 0:07:08.880 don't think he's quite in that top ten SP one 0:07:08.960 --> 0:07:10.520 range like the solid. 0:07:10.200 --> 0:07:11.960 SB two for sure, top fifteen. 0:07:13.960 --> 0:07:17.120 Yeah, I have to redo my starting pitcher rankings, but 0:07:17.200 --> 0:07:19.400 I think i'd probably have him somewhere in the fifteen 0:07:19.560 --> 0:07:20.000 ish range. 0:07:20.080 --> 0:07:21.120 Yeah, something like that. 0:07:21.000 --> 0:07:23.080 Okay, I guess because one of the things I'm curious 0:07:23.080 --> 0:07:27.880 about is, let's say he has a less than stellar 0:07:27.960 --> 0:07:30.520 start that comes up here expected dra is kind of 0:07:30.520 --> 0:07:33.280 maybe telling us that story. Maybe he you know, pushes 0:07:33.280 --> 0:07:35.520 back a little bit. If he gets one boos is 0:07:35.800 --> 0:07:39.640 ra up maybe over three? Is that a time that 0:07:39.760 --> 0:07:41.680 you would buy? Like, have you seen enough in these 0:07:41.760 --> 0:07:44.280 last two return starts that if he has kind of 0:07:44.320 --> 0:07:46.480 a bad one in the buying window kicks back up, 0:07:46.520 --> 0:07:48.360 you would do it? Or is he kind of on 0:07:48.440 --> 0:07:51.280 thin ice a little bit because you know, Whip has 0:07:51.280 --> 0:07:54.280 been up walks or up, Velo has been down, like 0:07:54.320 --> 0:07:56.280 what side Like, let's say he gives up like five 0:07:56.360 --> 0:07:58.120 in his next one, and that gets him over a 0:07:58.200 --> 0:08:01.400 three era Are you I don't want to buy? Or 0:08:01.440 --> 0:08:03.120 are you like this is your opportunity? 0:08:05.080 --> 0:08:09.080 It wouldn't excite me, but I think it would really 0:08:09.080 --> 0:08:12.080 depend on what the cost is, what the other person 0:08:12.120 --> 0:08:14.880 wants in return type of thing, because if he does 0:08:14.960 --> 0:08:17.200 have a really bad start, then you kind of have 0:08:17.240 --> 0:08:19.800 to wonder like, was this just the fact of he 0:08:19.920 --> 0:08:21.720 faced the Rockies And I know he had a good 0:08:21.760 --> 0:08:24.160 start against the Dodgers and the Mets as well, but 0:08:24.880 --> 0:08:27.400 I've walked against the Mets. Even at seven innings against 0:08:27.400 --> 0:08:30.800 the Dodgers it was five strikeouts. He's not classic Corbyn Burns, 0:08:31.240 --> 0:08:33.240 so if he does start getting knocked around a little 0:08:33.240 --> 0:08:34.960 bit again, it will make me worry, like he is 0:08:35.000 --> 0:08:37.960 not Corbyn Burns of the you know, the early days 0:08:37.960 --> 0:08:40.320 in Milwaukee anymore. I think he can adjust and still 0:08:40.320 --> 0:08:42.800 be really good. But if we start seeing him get 0:08:42.840 --> 0:08:45.240 blown up, and I don't have the schedule pulled up 0:08:45.240 --> 0:08:46.960 in front of me, let's see, so Burns, his next 0:08:46.960 --> 0:08:50.680 start is against the Dodgers again on Wednesday, So maybe 0:08:50.720 --> 0:08:53.280 we shouldn't sound the alarm fully because it's the Dodgers, 0:08:53.320 --> 0:08:55.920 but I'd like to see that's. 0:08:55.800 --> 0:08:57.680 Like the prime spot. That's what I'm talking about. Like, 0:08:57.920 --> 0:09:00.120 you know, he blanked the Dodgers in his last and 0:09:00.160 --> 0:09:02.760 let's say he gives up like four and runs goes 0:09:02.920 --> 0:09:05.520 five or something. People are like, oh, here we go. 0:09:05.640 --> 0:09:08.280 It's like, is that the opportunity to go and jump? 0:09:08.520 --> 0:09:10.640 I think it is. I kind of think it is. 0:09:10.679 --> 0:09:13.319 The Diamondbacks need him. He's going to press Filo kind 0:09:13.320 --> 0:09:17.000 of coming back up. I am worried about the you know, 0:09:17.040 --> 0:09:19.160 the era estimators, like it's going to go one way 0:09:19.240 --> 0:09:22.280 or the other that expects they expected era is either 0:09:22.400 --> 0:09:25.720 gonna live a little bit more in reality or it's 0:09:25.760 --> 0:09:29.080 going to come back down. It's almost a two run differential. 0:09:29.120 --> 0:09:31.839 It's not uncommon, especially for him. Actually, as I'm looking 0:09:31.880 --> 0:09:34.160 at it, I see some years where he has run 0:09:35.000 --> 0:09:39.120 about a run higher expected or lower than his actual era. 0:09:39.320 --> 0:09:42.640 But the last couple they have coincided well together that 0:09:42.760 --> 0:09:44.560 like one way or another, they're going to match up. 0:09:44.600 --> 0:09:46.839 But I still just think I think there's a. 0:09:46.800 --> 0:09:49.360 Negative connotation that's going on with him right now, and 0:09:49.400 --> 0:09:51.240 that's why I think he's a bible all of us. 0:09:51.880 --> 0:09:53.600 What I will say is, if we finish up the 0:09:53.640 --> 0:09:58.120 season and Corbyn burns has a two nine ERA and 0:09:58.200 --> 0:10:00.280 he has something like what we're seeing now and terms 0:10:00.320 --> 0:10:04.160 of the expected stats like a four something XCRA. I 0:10:04.200 --> 0:10:06.280 think that would be my time to tap out on 0:10:06.360 --> 0:10:08.560 him for next year though, with the strikeouts where they are, 0:10:08.600 --> 0:10:11.160 with the whip rising, with the walk rate, like if 0:10:11.160 --> 0:10:13.199 we see another year where he's kind of skating by 0:10:13.240 --> 0:10:15.199 the advanced metrics, I think then that's going to be 0:10:15.280 --> 0:10:17.000 cause for trouble as he enters into his thirties a 0:10:17.040 --> 0:10:17.400 little bit. 0:10:17.559 --> 0:10:18.000 I like that. 0:10:18.880 --> 0:10:21.360 We got two more. We got another prospect based question 0:10:21.440 --> 0:10:24.640 and another picture question. But let's get to the audience. 0:10:24.679 --> 0:10:27.079 We got some people hanging with us in the live discord, 0:10:27.520 --> 0:10:29.520 which as always, you guys can come and check out 0:10:29.520 --> 0:10:33.000 at fantasypros dot com slash chat. We would love to 0:10:33.000 --> 0:10:35.480 have you guys there every week. We got lots of 0:10:35.679 --> 0:10:38.480 other different great stuff as well the offerings, and there's 0:10:38.480 --> 0:10:39.199 a cool community. 0:10:39.240 --> 0:10:40.880 So you want to join a community. 0:10:40.559 --> 0:10:42.600 That's into all the stuff that you are, we'll check 0:10:42.640 --> 0:10:45.120 it out. And remember brand new time. We used to 0:10:45.160 --> 0:10:48.040 be Wednesdays at two pm Eastern for this five pm 0:10:48.040 --> 0:10:51.440 easterns on Monday on Monday, and I believe we're not 0:10:51.520 --> 0:10:55.120 here next week because of Memorial Day, so just keep 0:10:55.120 --> 0:10:57.439 that in your pocket. Let's get to some of the 0:10:57.520 --> 0:11:01.560 questions though from the audience. First one up from be Weazy, 0:11:01.679 --> 0:11:05.600 How are feeling about Westburg? If and when he comes back? 0:11:05.720 --> 0:11:07.720 Are you still a buyer on Jordan Westberg or not? 0:11:10.360 --> 0:11:11.760 It's a little concerning right now. 0:11:11.800 --> 0:11:14.120 The last thing that I saw is that his rehab 0:11:14.240 --> 0:11:16.160 was going to be delayed due to a setback in 0:11:16.240 --> 0:11:22.920 his hamstring. I'm I'm not dropping him, but my expectations 0:11:22.920 --> 0:11:25.280 are pretty low, especially with the way the Orioles have 0:11:25.360 --> 0:11:28.400 just been a complete disaster. I think we have to 0:11:28.480 --> 0:11:30.960 kind of recalibrate those expectations that we had coming into 0:11:31.000 --> 0:11:33.640 the season of maybe he's a twenty ten guy with 0:11:33.720 --> 0:11:36.160 a good batting average. I think he's still worth holding 0:11:36.160 --> 0:11:38.160 on to, but I'm not expecting the world anymore. 0:11:38.480 --> 0:11:40.400 I don't think I'm expecting the world, but I will 0:11:40.440 --> 0:11:43.240 say a lot of that profile that we got excited 0:11:43.240 --> 0:11:45.680 about and we were touting, it's still kind of there. 0:11:45.880 --> 0:11:48.480 Like he was barreling the ball up more, he was 0:11:48.520 --> 0:11:51.320 hitting the ball really hard, he wasn't striking out more, 0:11:51.400 --> 0:11:52.960 walking about the same he's expected. 0:11:53.000 --> 0:11:53.920 He expected. 0:11:53.920 --> 0:11:56.920 Batting average was down a tiny bit, but also like 0:11:56.960 --> 0:11:59.880 he was struggling and he was underperforming against forcing fast 0:11:59.840 --> 0:12:03.960 which is not something that maintains, especially for great or 0:12:04.040 --> 0:12:06.440 good fastball hitters. He hit two ninety four last year. 0:12:06.559 --> 0:12:09.600 He's hitting one oh seven against forcing fastballs. That's gonna adjust. 0:12:09.679 --> 0:12:11.679 So I tend to think he's a buyback. But at 0:12:11.679 --> 0:12:13.880 this point he's probably a guy that gets cut and 0:12:13.920 --> 0:12:16.400 you can pick up. I'm not sure he's super worth. 0:12:16.480 --> 0:12:18.679 Like holding on to also. 0:12:18.480 --> 0:12:21.800 Question injury base. My concern is just more about the 0:12:21.800 --> 0:12:23.840 injury setbacks. Like I don't think he's a bad player 0:12:23.880 --> 0:12:25.440 at all, but when you look at the injury plus 0:12:25.520 --> 0:12:28.439 the lineup under performing around him, he could be a 0:12:28.440 --> 0:12:30.480 good by low but I wouldn't pay a lot for 0:12:30.559 --> 0:12:31.760 him if you're going to be if you're going to 0:12:31.800 --> 0:12:33.880 be trading for him or using a top priority. 0:12:34.040 --> 0:12:37.079 So yeah, and he's not deserved of it. So torn 0:12:37.120 --> 0:12:39.720 on keeping Kim Hey Sun Kim from the Dodgers, He's 0:12:39.720 --> 0:12:40.680 been good when he plays. 0:12:40.720 --> 0:12:41.720 It's a roto league. 0:12:41.800 --> 0:12:44.199 We got a little bit extra of a positive push 0:12:44.280 --> 0:12:47.240 because they designated Chris Taylor for assignment. That was to 0:12:47.320 --> 0:12:51.040 keep him because Taoscar Hernandez just came back and then 0:12:51.200 --> 0:12:54.080 they sent down James Outman, So like they want to 0:12:54.160 --> 0:12:57.439 keep Kim on this lineup, on this team. He's never 0:12:57.480 --> 0:12:59.320 going to hit high, so I mean that is one 0:12:59.320 --> 0:13:00.920 thing that you're on percent going to have to come 0:13:00.960 --> 0:13:02.959 to terms with. But he's in four to fifty two. 0:13:03.320 --> 0:13:06.360 He's stealing bases, he's not striking out. He's become he 0:13:06.400 --> 0:13:09.200 looks like a valuable piece. So the question is is 0:13:09.240 --> 0:13:11.480 he worth it? Let's say in uh, well, I mean 0:13:11.480 --> 0:13:14.199 it's fifty he says, Rotos. I'm gonna ssume fifteen team Rotos. 0:13:14.320 --> 0:13:16.040 So let's start there and we'll push it to twelve 0:13:16.040 --> 0:13:17.240 and see what do you think. 0:13:18.280 --> 0:13:20.800 Is he worth as a keeper for next year? 0:13:22.840 --> 0:13:24.400 I don't know, I guess he said. I think when 0:13:24.400 --> 0:13:25.400 he says keeping. 0:13:25.200 --> 0:13:28.000 Kim, I think it's talking about like not making a 0:13:28.040 --> 0:13:31.160 move in redraft. I'm not assuming that that's a keeper 0:13:31.200 --> 0:13:31.760 league question. 0:13:32.960 --> 0:13:36.480 Well, we're talking about redraft. I mean, he has definitely 0:13:36.520 --> 0:13:38.800 got to be on rosters. He's hitting four fifty two. 0:13:38.840 --> 0:13:41.600 I know we're only talking about fourteen games, but he 0:13:41.640 --> 0:13:44.400 doesn't strike out a lot. Even like being at the 0:13:44.400 --> 0:13:48.640 bottom of that order, you're getting turned over to Otani, Betts, Freeman, Hernandez, 0:13:48.679 --> 0:13:50.640 will Smith like he is going to score, and we 0:13:50.679 --> 0:13:53.319 have seen that so far with Kim nine runs in 0:13:53.360 --> 0:13:56.760 fourteen games, he is three for three and stolen base opportunities. 0:13:57.320 --> 0:13:59.200 This is not a guy I would even consider dropping, 0:13:59.200 --> 0:14:01.000 even though he's not playing against lefties. He's a muss 0:14:01.080 --> 0:14:02.160 roster player in my view. 0:14:02.360 --> 0:14:05.600 Yeah, well said, and I agree, especially with the stolen 0:14:05.600 --> 0:14:08.920 base upside points leagues to even be better. You could argue, 0:14:09.800 --> 0:14:11.960 you know, if you don't believe, maybe there's a ton 0:14:11.960 --> 0:14:16.000 of like counting stat upside, maybe there's some questions there. 0:14:16.280 --> 0:14:17.840 But I think they're going to find time for him, 0:14:17.880 --> 0:14:20.560 and I think the rosters filling out like that. They 0:14:20.680 --> 0:14:23.720 moved on from guys like Barnes and then they moved 0:14:23.760 --> 0:14:27.280 on from Chris Taylor. I think you're more you would 0:14:27.280 --> 0:14:31.000 be more likely to lose Dalton Varshow at adult Varshow 0:14:31.200 --> 0:14:33.480 Dalton rushing than you would Kim at this point. So 0:14:33.480 --> 0:14:35.320 I think he's kind of locked in in So I 0:14:35.320 --> 0:14:40.480 agree with you. I agree Boren is Miguel Is this 0:14:40.560 --> 0:14:44.040 Miguel Vargas breakout for real? Vargas has been on a 0:14:44.080 --> 0:14:45.840 whole new thing in May I think it's like two 0:14:45.920 --> 0:14:48.600 ninety seven in May. We're seeing power, we're seeing all 0:14:48.600 --> 0:14:51.600 the stuff that actually got me excited in the preseason 0:14:51.640 --> 0:14:53.800 about him. Hits at the top of the lineup. But 0:14:53.840 --> 0:14:56.160 it is for as bad of a team as you 0:14:56.200 --> 0:15:01.440 could possibly be. So do you believe in Miguel Vargas. 0:15:02.640 --> 0:15:04.800 I do believe in him. You know. 0:15:05.120 --> 0:15:07.040 I was somebody who always thought the Dodgers should have 0:15:07.040 --> 0:15:09.240 given him another opportunity. I thought they'd moved on from 0:15:09.280 --> 0:15:11.480 him a little bit quickly. He's only twenty four when 0:15:11.480 --> 0:15:13.360 they got rid of him. The fact that he plays 0:15:13.400 --> 0:15:15.480 for a bad team on the surface, that will keep 0:15:15.480 --> 0:15:18.400 people away from him. But forty four games, he has 0:15:18.440 --> 0:15:21.440 twenty runs, twenty one RBI. That's not the end of 0:15:21.440 --> 0:15:24.680 the world. It's really not one fourteen WRC plus, he's 0:15:24.720 --> 0:15:27.120 has six homers. He's getting on base at a good clip. 0:15:27.120 --> 0:15:29.040 He doesn't strike out a lot. He's cut the strikeout 0:15:29.120 --> 0:15:31.560 rate from twenty four percent down to seventeen percent. 0:15:32.120 --> 0:15:32.840 I like him a lot. 0:15:32.880 --> 0:15:34.560 The fact that it's a bad team just means there's 0:15:34.600 --> 0:15:36.560 going to be more opportunities. There's no chance that he's 0:15:36.560 --> 0:15:38.560 going to get removed from the top of the order, 0:15:38.600 --> 0:15:41.200 he's going to lose playing time. Miguel Vargas is locked 0:15:41.200 --> 0:15:44.040 into that one through four area in the order, And 0:15:44.080 --> 0:15:46.640 while I'd prefer somebody better than Josh Pelasio is hitting 0:15:46.640 --> 0:15:49.600 behind him, I think that Vargus's breakout is pretty legit. 0:15:50.240 --> 0:15:51.960 I kind of agree with you on that too. I've 0:15:52.000 --> 0:15:55.240 always thought like the way that he can make contact, 0:15:55.280 --> 0:15:58.080 that he's going to run into good power. He's striking 0:15:58.080 --> 0:15:59.800 out less than he's ever done before. 0:16:00.840 --> 0:16:01.800 It's just minimal. 0:16:02.040 --> 0:16:03.240 You know, He's not going to have a lot of 0:16:03.240 --> 0:16:06.240 great RBI opportunities, not a lot of great run opportunities 0:16:07.200 --> 0:16:09.120 if he If he were on back on the Dodgers, 0:16:09.160 --> 0:16:11.160 we'd be having a completely different discussion. I me, who 0:16:11.160 --> 0:16:13.120 would you rather have, Miguel Vargus or High Sun Kim. 0:16:15.480 --> 0:16:17.240 I probably would go with Kim. 0:16:17.320 --> 0:16:19.240 I just think the counting stats are going to be bigger, 0:16:20.040 --> 0:16:22.520 the power with Vargas is going to be better, but not. 0:16:22.600 --> 0:16:24.320 To a degree that I would take him over Kim. 0:16:24.400 --> 0:16:30.000 Still, I think it's close, Yeah, just close, close for sure. Yeah, 0:16:30.080 --> 0:16:33.000 you know, like lead off top hitter with power projection 0:16:33.160 --> 0:16:34.840 over a guy who's going to hit number nine for 0:16:34.880 --> 0:16:38.120 the Dodgers. Occasionally you know are part time ISHU. 0:16:38.280 --> 0:16:41.560 So yeah, I get both. I get going with both 0:16:41.600 --> 0:16:44.360 of them. I would understand going either way. I think 0:16:44.360 --> 0:16:46.680 for me, I would just go with the Dodger over 0:16:46.720 --> 0:16:49.240 the White Sox, even though there's a different situation in 0:16:49.240 --> 0:16:51.640 the lineup and everything else. But I would have a 0:16:51.680 --> 0:16:53.760 hard time going with Vargas over Kim. They should both 0:16:53.800 --> 0:16:54.760 be on every roster though. 0:16:54.800 --> 0:16:58.480 I think, yeah, Papa Doc trying to get another outfielder depth, 0:16:58.640 --> 0:17:01.200 trying to get another outfielder death and have someone interested 0:17:01.200 --> 0:17:04.600 in trading Edmund. Should I trade Terrang or Perdomo to 0:17:04.680 --> 0:17:06.080 grab him? What do you think? 0:17:08.359 --> 0:17:11.679 I think either one would be reasonable. I was a 0:17:11.720 --> 0:17:14.639 big Bryce Terrang fan, not at the beginning of the season, 0:17:14.880 --> 0:17:17.119 but once the season started I thought his power was 0:17:17.160 --> 0:17:19.000 going to be a lot more legit after that first 0:17:19.000 --> 0:17:19.520 couple of weeks. 0:17:19.560 --> 0:17:20.480 He has not homers in the. 0:17:20.480 --> 0:17:23.400 Last thirty days, but the overall line is still very good. 0:17:23.440 --> 0:17:24.960 I think you can get a lot for him back 0:17:24.960 --> 0:17:28.359 in a trade for Perdomo. You're probably more equipped to 0:17:28.400 --> 0:17:31.760 answer this question being the DBAX guy. But he's been outstanding. 0:17:31.800 --> 0:17:34.200 He's hitting three hundred with five homers and eleven steals. 0:17:34.240 --> 0:17:36.159