Ken Rosenthal speculation: Juan Francisco to DET?

[DHonks]

I'm envisioning Overbay being let go or sent to AAA, Francisco playing a little, and Reynolds hitting .220 with 35 hr. Long live 3TO

[MVP2110]

I'm envisioning Overbay being let go or sent to AAA, Francisco playing a little, and Reynolds hitting .220 with 35 hr. Long live 3TO

Honestly if Reynolds hit that, that probably means a .300 obp or better. You could do much worse than that hitting 7 or 8 in our lineup

[PrinceEatMeat]

I'm envisioning Overbay being let go or sent to AAA, Francisco playing a little, and Reynolds hitting .220 with 35 hr. Long live 3TO

Honestly if Reynolds hit that, that probably means a .300 obp or better. You could do much worse than that hitting 7 or 8 in our lineup

 

Yeah, I think everyone would take that. I'd take 25 HR. That's still better production than they got at 1B last season, and with at least a bit better defense.

[Warning Track Power]

If Reynolds were to simply match his 2012 line, I would be "happy" as I think this is about his ceiling moving forward:

 

.221/.335/.429 23 HR 69 RBI

 

My fear is .200/.290/.400 15 HR 40 RBI

[sheetskout]

I'm surprised Rosenthal still has a job.

 

If you believed everything being written about players this time of year, you'd be convinced every team is coming north with 35 players, not 25.

 

The Brewers on one hand have been publicly marveling about Francisco's awesome power this spring. But they still went out this winter and looked at virtually every other option available at first base, eventually bringing in a flawed guy like Reynolds and the aging Overbay. If that's not a lack of confidence in Francisco, I don't know what is.

 

So Rosenthal is speculating on a landing spot for "Fan"cisco. It gets people talking. That's his job when it comes down to it.

 

If he gets a HOF vote and get's paid over $30,000 a year for creating discussion, which anybody at this site can do, then this is such a waste of money. Worse than the Federal Government spending 500 million on the research of squirrels.

 

Can you source this? I know it's off-topic, but I honestly don't think you're correct about this or Rosenthal.

[igor67]

If someone is going to inquire about money spent of researching squirrels it needs to be said that the throw away version of that statement shows Rosenthal's incredible ignorance. I do not know if the dollar value is remotely accurate or not, but the way in which the accusation is leveled is just plain wrong.I'll skip the attempts at polish and go straight for the pertinent facts on confronting the 'waste' myth (created for political purposes largely by WI own Bob Proxmire). The current fund rates on grant applications to the federal governments largest 2 sources (defense is separate) are right around 10%. That means only the 10% best as judged by qualified reviewers are getting funded. The second key fact is that major scientific research often focuses of species or other oddities that are not immediately obvious, in the case of genetics for example fruit flies pile up millions upon millions of research dollars which seems trivial unless you realize that most of what we learned about genetics that does make it into high school biology was learned between 1900-1950 as a result of fruit fly research, and as a result the fly is often the key to continued understanding of all sorts of things in modern research. I'm happy to go off topic with something lengthier if there is interest.

[502 to Right]

If someone is going to inquire about money spent of researching squirrels it needs to be said that the throw away version of that statement shows Rosenthal's incredible ignorance. I do not know if the dollar value is remotely accurate or not, but the way in which the accusation is leveled is just plain wrong.I'll skip the attempts at polish and go straight for the pertinent facts on confronting the 'waste' myth (created for political purposes largely by WI own Bob Proxmire). The current fund rates on grant applications to the federal governments largest 2 sources (defense is separate) are right around 10%. That means only the 10% best as judged by qualified reviewers are getting funded. The second key fact is that major scientific research often focuses of species or other oddities that are not immediately obvious, in the case of genetics for example fruit flies pile up millions upon millions of research dollars which seems trivial unless you realize that most of what we learned about genetics that does make it into high school biology was learned between 1900-1950 as a result of fruit fly research, and as a result the fly is often the key to continued understanding of all sorts of things in modern research. I'm happy to go off topic with something lengthier if there is interest.

 

 

And here I thought this was a baseball website.

 

 

As to baseball discussion - now that it appears that Francisco has been waived, I guess Detroit has a chance to get him for nothing.

[logan82]

Talking about politics is strictly against board policy or was.

[igor67]

Fair enough, I figured Proxmire was more history than politics at this point.

[gregmag]

That wasn't about politics; it was about science, which the original poster used as a basis of comparison. Except for the line about Proxmire. Whose name, I will point out at the risk of getting banned, was actually Bill, not Bob.

 

Trying to separate "politics" from everything else is incredibly hard. If the exchange above is somehow out of bounds, then this isn't a discussion forum worth the name.

[DHonks]

In fairness, isn't a critique of gov't different from a critique of a political view or party?

[brewcrewdue80]

Shouldn't this Subject be locked, since Juan is now with Toronto?