This article is not intended to take anything away from Chris Taylor. He made a great adjustment by improving his launch angle to turn into a productive hitter. To become an above-average hitter at age 27 after being basically a AAAA/bench type of player is quite amazing and not many can do that.

However, I read a lot of articles treating him like a star, and objectively, he is this season, since a 126 wRC+ and 4.7 WAR from a middle infielder is amazing.

Yet there are some concerns with him. He has some pop and now hits the ball at a solid angle, but his K/BB is not great. his K percentage was 25% this year. That is not super high and he might even be able to shave off another percent or two, but don’t expect a big jump here at his age. His BB percentage was 8.8%, which is OK, but not great for a relatively high-K guy. Overall, his K-BB% is definitely below average (16.2% for him vs 13.1% league average).

So to become an average or better hitter, he needs above-average power. He did improve his game power by improving his launch angle; however, 20 HR is basically just above average in these days, and his exit velo also is just about average (87.0 for him vs 87.3 league average). So there is raw power but it is somewhat limited. Now with the modern ball, you don’t need great raw power to hit it out, as Murphy or Altuve show, but since his LA is already about optimized at around 12 degrees (maybe 1-2 degrees can be added but then it would eat into BABIP), there isn’t much room for growth. I think around 25 should be his ceiling. Now 25 is great for a middle infielder, and Murphy and Altuve became elite hitters by raising their HRs to the mid 20s, but those two guys have a much better K-BB than Taylor — both are around 4%, vs the mentioned 16% for Taylor. Taylor simply needs his 25 HR to even become an average hitter while Murphy and Altuve are basically average hitters with “no” power (say 8 HR or so) and anything above that is positive.

Using my K-BB-ISO stat, Taylor’s -0.05 was about average. What made him elite was mostly his .361 BABIP. Now BABIP is not all luck and he does have a relatively low pop-up rate, and he also pulled just 38% of the time, meaning he is not super susceptible to the shift, but still his 87 MPH exit velo and 32% hard-hit rate are not marks of super great batted-ball quality (about average). He did have a 22% LD rate which is above average, but not amazing either.

Now, he is not slow, so I would maybe give him a .310 BABIP, but even then he will drop off quite a bit.

The xwOBA stat supports that, as his was .331 (around league average) vs. his actual wOBA of .368.

My projection for him next year would be around a 105 wRC+ and maybe a .265 average. Again, that is amazing for a middle infielder who basically was a bench player a year ago, and he should be worth at least like 3 WAR or so, but I would not overpay for him in fantasy. He did improve a lot, but he is no Turner/Murphy/Altuve because he doesn’t have their contact ability.

Rougned Odor had a disastrous 2017. Yes, he played all 162 games, which is not bad, and he hit 30 homers, which is not bad, but everything else was really, really bad. His slash line (.202/.254/.397) looks like that of an aging backup catcher. He was dead last in wRC+, behind even Jose Peraza. Behind even Dansby Swanson. Behind even Alcides Escobar, for God’s sake.

There have been 258 player-seasons where the player was in the lineup for all 162 national anthems. Odor’s was the eighth-worst as measured by bWAR (-0.2); in only 11 of these seasons did the player “achieve” a negative number. Most of these were either light-hitting middle infielders (players like Neifi Perez, the guy Alcides Escobar wanted to grow up to be) or aging diplodocuses (diplodocii?) like Pete Rose, still munching palm fronds (but no longer hitting much) at age 41. There are, however, two young power hitters among those 11, the 22-year old Ron Santo and the 25-year old Matt Kemp. Those with stock in Odor, Inc. will look to these seasons for inspiration, but they provide only limited hope.

Take Santo first. His poor 162-game season (at age 22) came a year after his first full year in the majors in 1961, a successful year in which he hit 23 homers, had an .841 OPS, and a wRC+ of 119. In 1962 Santo seemed to (very uncharacteristically) lose the plate. His walk rate dropped, his strikeout rate spiked, and his power plummeted. He hit only six fewer homers in 1962, but his ISO dropped by 60 points. (One can almost hear the retrograde Cubs coaches of the time telling Santo he needed to swing more and to stop being so patient.) The power would return in 1963, and the patience in 1964. Santo would never again have a walk rate below 10% until his depressing denouement with the White Sox in 1974.

Kemp’s career followed a somewhat similar path. The Bison had already assembled two effective offensive years before taking a long stride backward in 2009, his age-25 season. A far different player than the patient Santo, Kemp was always more of a close-eyes-and-swing-hard type, but the Ks really overwhelmed him in 2009, as his strikeout rate jumped almost 5% to 25.4%, the highest he would ever have in a fully healthy season. Some of Kemp’s retreat, however, could also be attributed to bad luck, however; he had the lowest BABIP of his career that year. And to be fair, other advanced metrics are not as harsh on him as bWAR — fWAR gave him a nice round zero that year, while his wRC+ checked in at 106, hardly encouraging for a supposed power-hitting outfielder, but hardly disastrous either. Kemp would go on the next season and win the MVP not win the MVP because Ryan Braun would — by assembling similar offensive rate stats as Kemp in 60 fewer plate appearances while playing poorer defense. With Kemp coming off a severely disappointing season and Braun not yet coming off his steroid exposure, this is perhaps more evidence that MVP awards are indeed path-dependent.

But I digress. The topic for today’s class is Rougned Odor, and one can see some similarities between his career track and those of the two power hitters just described. He’s coming off two solid years as a regular, and at age 23 is still young enough to turn things around and build a successful career. His team, i.e. the people who should know the most about him, thought enough of him to keep running him out there day after brutal day for the whole season, never benching him or sending him down. Chicks and everyone else dig the long ball, and like Santo and Kemp he’s clearly got that.

Not all the auguries are pleasant, however. Odor lacks even Kemp’s patience: his walk rate went up in 2017 to a still Rhode Island-sized 4.9%. Odor has the eighth-worst walk rate among active major leaguers. Odor’s career strikeout rate of 20.9% is better than Kemp’s, but his strikeouts ballooned to over 25% in 2017. Only Javier Baez, who recently filed a patent application on the letter “K”, had a higher rate among qualifying second basemen last year. This could be a good thing, though, in the sense that both Santo and Kemp had strikeout spikes during their bad years, which they both corrected, and Odor could too. Like Kemp, Odor also had a bad BABIP year, 50 points below his career number. Some of Odor’s next season, assuming he plays, will be a dead cat bounce; however bad Odor is, he’s almost certainly not as bad as the 2017 Odor.

But the lack of walks leaves him little room for error. And his minor-league track record is less impressive than those of Santo or Kemp, both of whom amassed an OPS of over .800 in the minors, and proceeded to do the same in the majors. Odor’s career minor-league OPS is .784, which is good but not great. Admittedly the statistical analogy is imperfect, but Whit Merrifield OPS’d at .784 in the majors at the keystone this year, good for ninth among second-base qualifiers. Advanced metrics yield a similar conclusion: Odor had a 106 wRC+ in his best season (in 2016). That’s Yangervis Solarte’s career mark, placing YS 16th among active second basemen. The signs, such as they are, don’t point to a Santovian, or even Kempian career, but rather a player whose upside is that of a first-division starter rather than an All-Star.

The Rangers would probably take that. They don’t have an obvious replacement for Odor at second, with Jurickson Profar’s career now a tire fire and Willie Calhoun apparently not fit for purpose at second. Hanser Alberto? No, probably not. Odor has shown he can strike out less, and indeed in the minors his strikeout to walk ratio was just a little over 2:1, much better than the 5:1 rate he’s shown at the majors, a rate that has washed out players like Wilin Rosario and Will Middlebrooks. If Odor can hold or build on his gain in patience (albeit from a very low base), lower the whiffs back to at least his career rate, and get some balls in play to go his way, he can return to his playable previous form.

And yet. It wasn’t long ago that the Rangers looked like a hotter, humider version of the Dodgers: a very good major-league team that could stay very good for a very long time by retooling on the fly rather than having to tank and rebuild. Remember these guys?

Baseball America’s Top 10 Rangers Prospects, 2012

1. Jurickson Profar
2. Martin Perez
3. Mike Olt
4. Leonys Martin
5. Neil Ramirez
6. Cody Buckel
7. Jorge Alfaro
8. Christian Villanueva
9. Rougned Odor
10. Matt West

To use a colloquialism I am given to understand is occasionally employed in Texas, that’s a lot of dry holes. Perez has become a serviceable league-average starter. They turned Alfaro (and most of what is now the Phillies farm system) into Cole Hamels. They gave Matt West the opportunity to explore the ancient and mysterious wonders of Japan. But that’s about it. Odor may yet break out and become a superstar — the Matt Kemp future is not completely out of reach. But the Rangers’ more achievable goal is to turn Odor into Yangervis Solarte. There are, to be fair, worse possible outcomes.

But, once upon a time, there were also better ones …

Baseball players are smart people. Over the past few years, they’ve figured out that ground balls are actually bad, so they stopped hitting them. Players like Yonder Alonso and Francisco Lindor started hitting more fly balls and, in turn, hit a lot more home runs. The entire league has caught on to this trend as well. In fact, as many of you may know, the MLB set a record this year, hitting 6105 home runs, nearly 500 more than the previous most in 2000. Now, this also has a lot to do with the fact that the ball may or may not juiced (which it more than likely is), but nevertheless, players have learned to adapt. Although the league FB% and GB% aren’t at extremes, it is very evident by the increase in home runs that the league has shifted towards a fly-ball mentality. Jeff Sullivan did a great breakdown of this earlier in the year, where he showed that the league-average exit velocities and launch angles and are all-time highs for the Statcast era. Players are making better contact at higher launch angles, and that’s something that the league has caught on to.

Players like the before-mentioned Alonso have changed their swings completely to full take advantage of the fly-ball revolution. Their swings prey on pitchers who throw low in the zone, and because of this, pitchers have adapted in turn. Teams like the Red Sox and the Rays have led the charge in throwing high fastballs, while pitchers like Trevor Bauer and Lance McCullers Jr. have started throwing a lot more breaking balls. The intention of this post isn’t to figure out what pitchers can change in order to succeed, but what pitchers already have the skillset to embrace the current fly-ball environment. For this search, I wanted to focus on a few different things: pitchers who already throw high fastballs, pitchers who give up a lot of fly balls and soft contact, and pitchers who induce the weakest contact according to Statcast.

The league-average fly-ball rate is 35.5% and the league-average hard-hit rate is 31.8%, so I looked for pitchers with a greater fly-ball rate and a lower hard-hit rate than the league average. As for the Statcast data, I looked for pitchers who induced the most pop-ups and fly balls who also induced the poorest contact on those balls put in play. Statcast also helped me find who threw the most fastballs up in the zone. I’ll list a few of the pitchers who have already embraced the fly ball and then go a little more in-depth on some guys who can look to break out in 2018 if they continue in their ways.

One name that immediately stuck out to me is Chris Sale, who has a case to win the American League Cy Young this year. Sale lives in the top of the zone and induces a ton of soft contact, but he also has the other dimension of striking literally everyone out and not giving up many home runs. Sale’s skillset makes him one of the best pitchers during the fly-ball revolution. Below him, there are a few more established names, like Ervin Santana, Marco Estrada, and Jeff Samardzija, a group of solid pitchers who strike out a decent number of batters, but not a ton, and also have some home-run problems. That being said, all of them had an fWAR of 2.9 or higher, proving them to be successful against opponents by learning to love the fly ball. The next few names that’ll get listed off are up and coming players who haven’t had much exposure and are still adjusting to the league. I’ll be giving a short profile for each.

Ariel Miranda

Now, I know what you’re thinking: Ariel Miranda is, in fact, a pretty bad pitcher. I’m not trying to say he’s good, but I’m saying there are some faint glimmers of potential here. Miranda is a 28-year-old lefty who found himself pitching in what was the Mariners’ desolate wasteland of a starting rotation in 2017. Due to a multitude of injuries, Miranda started 29 games for Seattle and was, in all reality, bad. This was mainly due to the fact that he allowed an egregious 2.08 HR/9, but thankfully, we know that home-run rate fluctuates from year to year. His over-inflated HR/9 is definitely caused in part by a 52.5% fly-ball rate and a fastball with a lot of rise, but Miranda never had a HR/9 over 1.0 in the minors, so there’s a chance he can rebound and use his ability to generate soft contact in the future. In 2017, he had a below-average hard-hit rate, and according to Statcast, 5.9% of his pitches resulted in weak, fly-ball contact.

Eduardo Rodriguez

After an impressive 2016, Eduardo Rodriguez continued to succeed in 2017 despite injury. In fact, he may be the most promising of this bunch. Although he has a lower fly-ball rate than Miranda and his opponents make better contact, his HR/9 is much better at 1.25. Rodriguez also strikes everyone out, showcasing 9.83 K/9 with great stuff, including a plus change. Rodriguez has already shown he can succeed in the league and it looks like he’ll continue to do so.

Reynaldo Lopez

Lopez was one of the key pieces in the Adam Eaton trade of last offseason. Lopez only pitched in 8 games last year for the White Sox, and although the stats weren’t super impressive, there’s a lot of reason to be optimistic. He throws very hard and throws 31.4% of his fastballs up in the zone, while also being in the upper echelon of creating weak contact. 6.78% of his pitches resulted in weak fly-ball contact, and Lopez also posted a great 27.8% hard-hit rate. If he can keep his control under wraps, while keeping the ball in the yard like he did last year, he could break out in 2018. The only thing that could be an issue are his strikeouts, but his numbers in the minors suggest those will catch up.

Ben Lively

I’ll be honest: I didn’t even know Ben Lively was a baseball player until a day ago. Lively surprised in 2017, coming basically out of nowhere and posting a pretty average year, but I don’t think a whole lot of people even saw that coming. He didn’t strike anyone out, but he also didn’t walk a whole lot of people, and did a decent job of keeping the ball in the yard. Lively also throws the ball up in the zone and gives up 44.2% fly balls. He’s probably the most vanilla out of all of these pitchers, but the fact that he gives up below-average hard contact (30.2%) means that he could continue to surprise in this environment.

Brock Stewart

As if the Dodgers didn’t have enough exciting young players, Brock Stewart is yet another electric arm with good velocity who came up as a starter, but also could profile as a reliever. Stewart was very good at limiting hard contact; only 22.5% of his hits resulted in hart contact. That being said, he didn’t throw up in the zone very often and gave up the lowest amount of fly balls at 40%, but his HR/9 was below average at 1.05. Now, it’s debatable whether or not Stewart is a true fly-ball pitcher, but his fly balls when he gets them are very weak, so I’ll give him a pass.

It will be interesting to see where these starters go in 2018, and whether or not these assumptions actually mean anything. It could be that they’re just bad, and that hitters will just crush everything that they throw. But, I like to think that if hitters have dramatically changed their swing planes to focus on low balls and are struggling to catch up to high pitches (and when they do, the ball is hit very softly), then maybe this group will have a chance. Baseball is a game of adaptation, and fortunately for these guys, their skillsets fit that adaptation, so it will be interesting to see what 2018 holds.

As one of the greatest pitchers of our generation, one might think that it is extremely unlikely that Clayton Kershaw would have what we would consider a ‘problem.’ As a seven-time All-Star, a three-time (potentially four-time) Cy Young winner, and an NL MVP, Kershaw has been the model of consistency over the past number of seasons, and as his career progressive ERA would dictate, he gets better each and every season. But if there were one knock on Kershaw, especially over the last season, he has been extremely prone to the long ball. His HR/9 rate in 2017 was 1.18, significantly higher than his previous high, which rang in at 0.92 in 2008. Between 2008 and 2017, the highest HR/9 during that span was 0.63 in 2012.

Also at a career high this season was his HR/FB rate. This season, he came in at 15.9%, compared to his previous career high, which also came in 2008, at 11.8%. So it wasn’t just an increased number of fly balls that led to his inflated HR/9, but as we can see with the high HR/FB rate, more of the fly balls hit left the yard.

Expanding on that even further, in his regular-season career, Kershaw has given up 128 home runs. Of those 128, 75 of them have been solo home runs (58.6%). This season, of the 23 home runs Kershaw surrendered, 15 of them were solo shots (65.2%). League-wide this season, of the 6105 home runs that were hit, 3495 were of the solo variety. This is 57.2%. Kershaw’s career average is on par with the major-league average, but this year, there is a significant spike in the percent of solo home runs that Kershaw gave up. Is this because Kershaw took it easy with the bases empty? Or because hitters have finally realized that stringing together three hits in an inning off of Kershaw can seem about as impossible as licking your elbow? (Real question is how many of you just tried to lick your elbow.)

Whether or not 2017 will turn out to be an outlier for Kershaw in terms of the home-run ball remains to be seen. Will hitters continue on the same trend, thinking that the long ball is the only way to beat Kershaw? Only time will tell. As for things we do know, while giving up the most home runs of his career, Kershaw still remained near the top of the list of best pitchers in the game. And while he missed six starts in July/August, he will still receive numerous Cy Young votes, although I predict he will come up short.

Kershaw, as proven last Thursday night in the Dodgers’ 11-1 rout of the Cubs to clinch the NL Pennant, remains terrific. The home run that Kershaw gave up to Kris Bryant was a cheap one. The ball was hit at 94mph, at a 32 degree launch angle. The expected average given that combination is an abysmal .136, and is a home run just 6% of the time (via Mike Petriello). Granted, not all home runs that Kershaw gives up are like that, but maybe Kershaw just ran into some bad luck this past season.

So given Kershaw’s resume, and the fact that he somehow finds a way to lower his career ERA each and every season, just how good could Kershaw be next year if he fixes his “problem?” The sky’s the limit, and if anyone could reach the sky, it would be Kershaw.

In the middle of the 2017 season, it looked as though the New York Mets were in dire need of a serviceable catcher. Now, heading into the offseason, it looks as though the position will actually be one of their last priorities.

For the past four seasons, the Mets’ catchers have been led by the inconsistent and oft-injured Travis d’Arnaud. d’Arnaud was called up in 2013 and struggled mightily right out of the gate with a 60 wRC+, but figured things out a bit in 2014 when he played in 108 games while providing roughly league-average offense and an overall 1.3 WAR season. He had his best offensive season in 2015, but he missed a lot of time due to injuries, playing in only 67 games with an impressive 130 wRC+. 2016 was a down year for him as he played in only 75 games and had a down year at the plate. 2017 was the best year for him health-wise, as he set career highs in most counting stats. However, he had a mediocre and inconsistent year at the plate, and until August 19^th, he was batting just .231/.279/.400 (76 wRC+). d’Arnaud was once a well-regarded prospect, but he seemed to molding into an inconsistent mediocre offensive catcher. And this doesn’t even include his struggles with throwing out runners.

And the problem was, there was nobody behind him who could do a serviceable job at catcher every day. d’Arnaud’s offense may have been underwhelming, but it was at least good enough to keep him in the lineup regularly. From 2014-2016, the Mets ranked 26^th of the 30 teams in cumulative catcher wRC+ and 27^th in cumulative catcher WAR. d’Arnaud was mediocre and oft-injured while the six other catchers who filled in for him in that time frame ranged from bad to downright awful. Five of those six were veteran backup/minor-league catchers who you shouldn’t have expected much from, but one of them was particularly disappointing, and that was former 2012 2^nd round pick Kevin Plawecki. Like d’Arnaud, the Mets once viewed Plawecki as a potential future franchise catcher, and while Plawecki did prove to be better defensively than d’Arnaud, with a much better arm and better pitch-framing, his hitting was unfortunately pathetic, as in this three-year time span he collected 409 plate appearances and a terrible .211/.287/.285 batting line. Unsurprisingly, Plawecki also collected a lot of time in Triple-A during this time, and he continued to mash down in the hitter-friendly environment of Las Vegas, but he just could never things out with the bat at the major-league level.

Plawecki started the 2017 season in the majors, and through May 21 he collected 28 plate appearances and batted just .125/.214/.167. One noticeable thing about his offense despite his struggles was that he continued to post a pretty good walk rate of 8.2% and a surprisingly respectable 22.1% strikeout rate. His overall batting profile looked pretty mediocre, and his batted-ball direction profile was pretty even in terms of using all fields. The main problem for Plawecki was that he just wasn’t hitting the ball hard enough or hitting enough line drives.

Plawecki then spent a huge chunk of the season in Triple-A, where, as always, he hit really well, and then he returned on August 19^th and completely turned things around. The sample size was still relatively small, but in the 90 plate appearances Plawecki had to close out the season, he hit .303/.411/.474, good for a 137 wRC+, and he did this while posting a fairly normal .333 BABIP. His walk rate went from good to great, as he walked 13.3% of the time while striking out only slightly more at 14.4% of the time. This is a manager’s dream nowadays, in an era where hitters are striking out more than ever, and Plawecki managed to do this while improving greatly in the contact he made, the quality of contact and most importantly, his power. Until his late-season turnaround, he had always had an ISO far below .100, which is awful, and he improved that mark to an above-average .170. Plawecki had finally converted his success in the minors to the majors, and it’s really impressive how he improved in every area of his game. He increased walks, decreased strikeouts, increased contact and increased power. Obviously he still has a little ways to go before he establishes himself as a reliable starting catcher, but if this hot streak proves to be more than just a fluke, Plawecki could actually blossom into one of the most well-rounded catchers in the game. The charts below show how significant and surprising Plawecki’s resurgence was.

Kevin Plawecki From 4/21/15 to 5/21/17

Kevin Plawecki from 8/19/17 to 10/1/17

Relatively small sample size aside, this was still extremely encouraging of someone who was seemingly molding into a classic AAAA hitter and disappointing prospect. He looked like a completely different hitter when he came back, as he was more selective and had a quality at-bat seemingly every time he came to the plate. So all hope is in fact not lost for Kevin Plawecki.

But what’s just as notable about Plawecki’s hot streak is that it must have fired some competition into d’Arnaud, who turned his season around with an even hotter streak of his own in this time period. From when Plawecki returned from the minors, August 19^th, until the end of the season, d’Arnaud slashed an impressive .297/.350/.571 (141 wRC+) after that bad start I mentioned earlier of only a 76 wRC+ until that point. Like Plawecki, d’Arnaud accomplished this new level with a sustainable BABIP (.279). Here’s a chart of what d’Arnaud did through August 19^th vs. what he did after.

Travis d’Arnaud From 4/3/17 to 8/19/17

Travis d’Arnaud From 8/20/17 to 10/1/17

Like Plawecki, d’Arnaud began walking more, striking out less, and hitting for power, all extremely good signs. d’Arnaud is more of a power-hitting catcher than Plawecki, as he is below average in drawing walks, while Plawecki is more of an OBP-centered player who also happens to have an above-average amount of power with his big, muscular body type. If they can really use these tools to their full potentials like they did in their late-season surges, they can both be quality starting catchers or at the very least, one can be a solid backup for the other.

In addition to d’Arnaud and Plawecki, the Mets also have a catcher rising through their farm system to keep an eye on named Tomas Nido, an eighth-round pick in the 2012 draft (the same draft that Plawecki was picked in). Nido’s not a huge prospect, but the Mets are still excited and optimistic with him and believe that he has the tools to be a starting catcher. Nido is described by fangragsports.com as “a very strong and powerful catcher. He has an ideal frame to be a catcher in professional baseball.” The 23-year-old is 6’0′ and 210 lbs, so he has the frame and strength, but it is also mentioned that he has an aggressive approach at the plate and has a long swing that he uses to try and blast home runs, and scouts wish he could tame that swing a little to try and hit for a better average. Nido didn’t hit much in rookie ball or A-ball, but he hit very well in High-A ball in 2016 when he hit .320/.357/.429. Unfortunately, he didn’t make a great transition to Double-A this year, where he hit just .232/.287/.354. He got a late September call-up to the majors at the end of the season and got three hits in his first six at-bats before collecting a tough 0-4 day in the final game of the season, so he ultimately went 3-10 at the highest level. Nido is a good defensive catcher, and figures to spend all or most of 2018 in Triple-A Las Vegas, where hopefully the hitter-friendly environment will allow him to really find his swing and have a chance to produce at the major-league level. Nido has no one tool that overwhelms, but if he puts it all together he has a chance to be a solid major-league catcher.

Overall it seems as though the Mets have more depth at the catcher position than they realized if d’Arnaud and Plawecki’s late-season surges mean anything. d’Arnaud is an established mediocre starting catcher with potential for much more, while Plawecki and Nido are still yet to really establish themselves in the majors and are going to need a little more development before the Mets can commit to either one of them as a starting catcher. But these hot streaks and the continued development of Nido should leave Mets fans excited for the potential of a great major-league catching tandem. And due to this newly realized depth at the position, it would no longer make sense to spend money on someone like Jonathan Lucroy in free agency, as it may have made sense three months ago. At this point in Lucroy’s career, the extra money spent wouldn’t be worth the slight upgrade, or possibly even downgrade, of Lucroy compared to what they have now. What the Mets need to do next season is give both d’Arnaud and Plawecki a fair shot, and whoever hits more gets to play more, while keeping note of Nido’s development in case he is needed at the major-league level. But the Mets should feel fairly comfortable with their in-house catching options and it should be one of their last priorities heading into the 2017-2018 offseason.

The 2017 season marked a career best for many players. As the season commenced we saw records broken, position depth expanded, and some truly remarkable moments.

Let me tell you why Troy Tulowitzki’s “elite level” is most definitely a thing of the past.

The shortstop position, specifically, is arguably the deepest in all of baseball, with names like Corey Seager, Carlos Correa, and Francisco Lindor bolstering the young crop of incredible talent. Of course there are also the rising stars in Didi Gregorius, Xander Bogaerts, and Addison Russell. Yet the one name who seems to be disappearing more and more each season is Troy Tulowitzki.

Tulowitzki is one of baseball’s best players over the past decade, and for a while he was heralded as the best shortstop in the league. From the year 2007 to 2015, in a Rockies uniform, Tulo wRC+’ed less than 100 once. In his two full “seasons” with Toronto he’s already wRC+’ed a new career low, 78.

Whether it’s the “Coors effect” or not, there is no denying that Tulowitzki was one of baseball’s finest players, and one of the more exciting to watch whilst with the Rockies — Coors Field in itself has a 27% OPS change due to its atmosphere, which gives a huge advantage to hitters.

Evidently so; Tulo’s road splits compared to his home ones were unbalanced.

Tulowitzki’s Road vs. Home OPS splits from 2007-2015

• 2007
  • HOME- .960 OPS
  • AWAY- .719 OPS
• 2008
  • HOME- .704 OPS
  • AWAY- .758 OPS
• 2009
  • HOME- 1.000 OPS
  • AWAY- .859 OPS
• 2010
  • HOME- 1.034 OPS
  • AWAY- .863 OPS
• 2011
  • HOME- .948 OPS
  • AWAY- .881 OPS
• 2012 *played 50 total games
  • HOME- .793 OPS
  • AWAY- .908 OPS
• 2013
  • HOME- 1.008 OPS
  • AWAY- .848 OPS
• 2014
  • HOME- 1.246 OPS
  • AWAY- .811 OPS
• 2015 *half season w/ COL
  • HOME- .831 OPS
  • AWAY- .697 OPS

Despite the lopsided splits, he still posted great numbers each season. However, the huge gap between his OPS per season on the splits should’ve raised some eyebrows, no?

During his tenure with the Rockies, Tulowitzki earned four All-Star appearances, two Gold Gloves, and two Silver Slugger awards, putting together a rather staggering resumé.

He posted a combined WAR with Colorado of 35.5, and posted a 5.0 WAR or better six times, making him one of the most consistent players in the league. So where or when did it seem to change?

The one large setback in Tulo’s Colorado career, and his biggest issue now, is his health. In his 12-year career, he’s only played 131+ games twice. He’s had issues staying on the field, and for that reason should be called one of the worst contracts in recent MLB memory. His Toronto days are an ugly reflection of his once-great Colorado ones.

Tulo since joining Toronto:

• 987 PA over 238 games
• .727 OPS (over three seasons)
• 101 wRC+ (2015 half with COL), 103 wRC+ (2016), 78 wRC+ (2017)
•  3.3 WAR (total over three seasons)

It can be argued that Troy Tulowitzki is washed up. His lack of production and inability to stay healthy make him more of a burden than an advantage for Toronto.

Tulowitzki was traded (in the summer of 2015) for prospects Jeff Hoffman, Miguel Castro, and Jesus Tinoco, as well as Jose Reyes, yet he has not been anywhere near the player Toronto was expecting to have for a few years.

Needless to say, it looks like the Rockies made the smart move offloading their star player.

His contract with the Blue Jays is a huge blemish on their team, which is full of horrid contracts. He signed a 10-year, $158-million deal with the Rockies back in 2011, and made $20 million with the Blue Jays this season. He appeared in just 66 games.

This is how his salary pays out until the end of the 2021 season:

2018- $20 million

2019- $20 million

2020- $14 million

2021- $15 million option, $4 million buyout

For a player that was already questioned by many because he had the luxury of playing for the Colorado Rockies, earning the initial contract he was given was a great deal if he stayed in a Rockies uniform for his entire career. However, some things are not meant to be.

Tulowitzki’s player value during 2016 and 2017

• Batting: 1.8 (2016) / -.7 (2017)
• Base Running: -2.7 (2016) / -3.5 (2017)
• Fielding: 4.9 (2016) / -1.1 (2017)
• Positional: 5.5 (2016) / 2.9 (2017)
• Offense: -0.8 (2016) / -10.5 (2017)
• Replacement: 16.4 (2016) / 8.0 (2017)

For context, here are Carlos Correa’s past two seasons:

• Batting: 17.9 (2016) / 30.7 (2017)
• Base Running: 4.0 (2016) / 1.6 (2017)
• Fielding: -2.3 (2016) / -1.7 (2017)
• Positional: 7.0 (2016) / 4.8 (2017)
• Offense: 21.9 (2016) / 32.4 (2017)
• Replacement: 19.9 (2016) / 14.9 (2017)

There are clear indications that Tulo has lost a step. He didn’t even play a single game the entire second half of the season, after being placed on the 10-day DL with a hamstring issue. His health, bat speed, and glove work are all in question.

A key contributor to his demise is claimed to be the turf in Rogers Centre. Transitioning from the usual field in Colorado to a false grass in an indoor stadium midway through your age-31 season can be rather tough on the joints and muscles.

While Tulowitzki has had his moments in a Blue Jays uniform, there is no way that this was a move for the future, despite what general manager Alex Anthopoulos said following the trade back in 2015.

Anthopoulos on July 25th, 2o15: “I just think we got better, for the short and for the long term. Ideally, you don’t shop in the rental market; that doesn’t mean we’ll rule it out, we’re open to it, but our preference is always for guys who are under control and will be here for a while.” — “This is a long-term acquisition.”

Since acquiring Tulowitzki, the Blue Jays have been seemingly getting worse each season. While this may in no way be Tulo’s fault, the fact that his production has dipped drastically does indicate his lack of contribution.

• 2015 record: 93-69
• 2016 record: 89-73
• 2017 record: 76-86

The move “for the future” looks to be more of a “weight from the past” if anything. I find that Troy Tulowitzki was one of the best talents that baseball had seen, three or so years ago. Now he is holding his team back, and should be viewed as a washed-up player.

While Tulo’s power is still there — he posted hard-hit rates over 30% each season with Toronto — it is clear that he cannot perform anywhere near what he once was able to do. Whether you blame that on his injuries, the Coors effect, or whatever else it may be, there is a clear line that Tulo has passed into the downfall of his career.

Troy Tulowitzki’s value is diminishing yearly, and when it’s all said and done, the possibility of Toronto eventually just terminating his contract seems more and more likely. With each swing of the bat, and 0-for-4 performance, Tulo is just shooting himself in the foot. A once greatly valued and important player, he’s now a mediocre-tier shortstop, based on value. His age isn’t helping him — neither is the turf — and the fact that he is now seemingly slowing down in the field as well means the future is looking dimmer and dimmer for Tulo.

Although it can be said that it is “too early” to judge this trade, based on the lack of performance history for the players Colorado has received, it can be said that they offloaded the contract of Tulowitzki, and have seen better days because of it.

With his fantastic career behind him, Tulo most definitely will not be calling it quits. Because of his immense contract, and money he has pouring in, the long-tenured SS will likely be seeing more and more time off the field, and as a DH rather than out there every day.

At this point in his career, seeing as to how he seems to be frequently bouncing on and off the DL, Tulo’s value is diminishing each season. The fact that the Blue Jays still are set to owe him $58 million over the next three seasons, and how his “One Trade” clause has been used already by Colorado, does not sit well for them. While he sells tickets and jerseys, no one wants to come watch someone go 0-for-4 over the course of only playing 60 games. With the fall of Tulo comes the rise of the extremely talented pool of IF players that MLB has to offer.

We should be grateful for Tulo’s production over the past several years, but it is time for his once reserved place among MLB’s top shortstops to be dismissed.

We can go ahead and continue using the flawed voting of yesteryear as our benchmark for what constitutes a Hall of Famer, or we can say, “scrap that, our Hall-of-Fame-voting forefathers had it wrong and it’s our job to make it right!”

When I watch CC Sabathia and Justin Verlander dealing like aces more than a decade after they were first dubbed “aces,” I feel like I am watching careers that are deserving of Hall-of-Fame induction.

We are now 17 seasons removed from when CC went 17-5 and finished runner-up to Ichiro Suzuki in the 2001 AL Rookie of the Year voting. We are 12 seasons removed from when Justin Verlander went 17-9 with an ERA+ of 125 to win the 2006 AL Rookie of the Year award.  And if you surveyed any GM in those early years, they would be hard-pressed to prescribe better career arches than the ones these two guys have put together.

CC won the 2007 AL Cy Young Award, was the best pitcher in all of baseball in 2008, and was the staff ace of the World Series champion Yankees in 2009. He has 237 career wins, a .619 winning percentage, 2846 strikeouts and an ERA+ of 117, which is the same as Gaylord Perry and higher than Steve Carlton, Phil Niekro, Fergie Jenkins, Robin Roberts, and Nolan Ryan.

Justin Verlander won both the AL Cy Young and MVP award in 2011, has a .623 winning percentage and has led the league in strikeouts four times. He brought the Tigers out of the division basement and into perennial contention. In addition, his ERA+ of 124 puts him ahead of Juan Marichal, Bob Feller, Warren Spahn, and Don Drysdale. These are inner-circle Hall of Famers!

Both CC and Verlander have finished in the top five in Cy Young voting five times. They also rank 17th and 15th, respectively in all-time Win Probability Added (WPA). Yet, because other pitchers that combined dominance with longevity have been denied Hall of Fame induction, CC and Verlander’s odds, as they stand today, cannot be certain. I’m talking guys like Mike Mussina, Curt Schilling, Rick Reuschel, Luis Tiant, and Kevin Brown. Even Doc Gooden, Dave Stieb, Bret Saberhagen, Orel Hershiser and David Cone. Even though many of these pitchers’ careers occurred before my time, the company they keep with CC and Verlander in the Hall of Sabermetrics tells me enough about their Hall-of-Fame worthiness.

I wish that the Veterans Committee would have a watershed moment and fix the mistakes of our Hall-of-Fame-voting forefathers, but I am not going to hold my breath. Luckily for CC and Verlander, both are willing and able to add to their resumes. But the question is, how much more do they need to do?

We saw the Yankees basically bullpen the AL wild-card game. Sure, it was on accident, but their bullpen pitched 8.2 innings. And they did it well. This made me think about whether a team could put together a pitching staff that is almost completely used for bullpenning for the entire season.

To see if this would be possible, we will look at the Yankees since they are the team most closely equipped for it already. In the wild-card game, they essentially used four relief pitchers (let’s not count the one out Luis Severino had). Chad Green, David Robertson, Tommy Kahnle, and Aroldis Chapman combined for 8.2 innings and one earned run. Clearly, if a team could do this all the time, they would. In that game they did not use other relievers Dellin Betances and Adam Warren, as well as regular starting pitchers Jordan Montgomery and Jaime Garcia, who would have been available that night.

Since we now know what happened in that bullpen game, can we find out if it is possible to do it over a full season? First off, and MLB roster is comprised of 25 men for any given game and an additional 15 that can be called up if needed. An AL team can get by with 12 position players: one for every starting position (including DH) plus a fourth outfielder, utility infielder, and backup catcher.  Let’s say a team’s backups can field multiple positions, like many can. We can get rid of the everyday DH and use one of the backups or starters in that role for a needed day off. That leaves us with 11 position players and room for 14 pitchers.

Many of the Yankees’ own relievers can go multiple innings. Among those pitchers are Chad Green, David Robertson, Tommy Kahnle, Adam Warren, and occasionally Aroldis Chapman and Dellin Betances. Each are effective in their own right. The problem we have to face is the amount of rest needed for these pitchers. The four from the wild-card game each pitched with two days of rest, so we’ll set that as a bench mark. I also don’t want to assume a team needs five pitchers each game like they did in the wild card.

I don’t want to completely get rid of the starting pitcher. It would be dumb to just throw away what Luis Severino and other starters bring to that team. Instead, I want to put a hard limit on how much they pitch each game and how often they pitch. Theoretically, a team could go with a three-game cycle of pitchers. Games are played almost every day during the season, so the two days of rest benchmark will be used here. If we are using four pitchers per game every three games, we need 12 pitchers.

I didn’t make this with any set reason, just the best options the Yankees would have in my view. There are many other options available for them and some may be even better. But, if this is the set of pitchers being used, that leaves two extra spots for our 14 available pitchers. Those two extra spots can be utilized for guys needed for extra innings that can pitch multiple innings, or a guy needed for an inning or two in case one of the above gets into trouble.

If a team were to go by this set of pitchers, the regular starting pitchers would be throwing 162 innings over a season. That would be seen as pretty normal for a starting pitcher over the course of a season and in some cases much less. Severino pitched 193 innings himself. The relievers, however, would see a pretty big bump in action. They would pitch 108 innings in a season, more than any of the pitchers above did last year. However, some of those pitchers were starters to begin their careers. Green, Warren, Betances, and Holder have each pitched more than 108 innings in a season. Now, that could be a reason for their increased effectiveness as relievers, but they would still only be pitching two innings in a game, not five or six.

It is possible to ask these relievers to stretch their arms out to be able to throw that many innings in a season. Relievers do transition to starting and this wouldn’t be quite the workload necessary. If a pitcher needs a break during a cycle through this set of pitchers, that could be what the additional two pitchers on the roster are for, or some of the 40-man pitchers could be called up to give a guy a break. They could also call up an actual starter from the minors to take over for four or five innings after the three-inning “starter” in this example. My point here is that if the relievers get tired over the course of a season, there are ways to give them breaks. Plus, the Yankees have so many resources and available pitchers that they have that capability to give breaks.

If the Yankees wanted to, they could keep Severino, Tanaka, Gray, Green, Warren, Robertson, Kahnle, Betances, and Chapman all on the roster for the whole season. That makes up 3/4 of the necessary pitchers. Shreve, Holder, and Gallegos could each be cycled up and down from AAA with other pitchers like Ben Heller, Domingo German, etc. in order to give breaks to the core nine pitchers. Another solution is to go out and get more relievers who can pitch multiple innings on a regular basis. They certainly have the prospects to do that. Pitchers like Brad Hand, Yusmeiro Petit, and Mike Minor each pitched over 77 innings and were very effective doing so.

Clearly there is much more that would be needed to make this a reality, and I don’t have the resources to know if it is even possible. Maybe these guys simply couldn’t pitch that many innings over a full season or they would lose too much velocity of break on their pitches from fatigue. But I saw David Robertson pitch 3.1 masterful innings in the wild-card game and pitch another 1.2 innings three days later. Obviously that is only two outings, but he was nevertheless effective in doing it, and I believe if any team could make this happen, it would be the Yankees.

In the NLDS, Stephen Strasburg was absolutely brilliant for the Nationals in his two starts. Due to an injury to Max Scherzer, Strasburg got the ball for Game 1 and was dominant. He threw 5.2 innings of no-hit ball before giving up back-to-back RBI singles to Kris Bryant and Anthony Rizzo that allowed two unearned runs to score thanks to a rare error by Anthony Rendon. Strasburg finished with an impressive line of 7 IP 3 H 2 R 0 ER 1 BB and 10 K in a losing effort. Although his outing was ruined by the unearned runs and Kyle Hendricks’ outstanding start which shut down the Nationals offense, Strasburg made the Cubs hitters look foolish all night long. Getting the ball once again with his team down 2-1 in the series, Strasburg turned in another absolute gem in Game 4. In a 5-0 victory, Strasburg threw seven shutout innings, scattering three hits while walking two and striking out 12. In his two starts combined, Strasburg threw 14 innings without allowing an earned run, while only giving up six hits with three walks to go along with 22 strikeouts.

The dominance on display by Strasburg is nothing new. Despite being the second-best pitcher on his team, Strasburg is an ace and finished second (behind Scherzer) among NL pitchers with 5.6 WAR. When Strasburg come to mind, the immediate thought goes to his power fastball. It’s one of the main reasons why the Nationals selected him with the first overall pick in the 2009 draft. He throws the pitch with an average velocity of 95.6 MPH good for fifth among qualified pitchers. Yet, Strasburg also loves to throw changeups, especially to right-handed hitters. Throughout the course of the regular season, Strasburg threw 16.3% changeups to right-handed hitters. This is an absurdly high amount for a power pitcher like Strasburg. Typically right-on-right changeups are primarily thrown by low-velocity sinkerballers, since changeups typically have the same movement as their sinker despite being thrown 5-10 MPH slower. Conventional wisdom has dictated for years that power pitchers should throw fastballs and curveballs (or sliders) to the same-handed hitters while throwing fastballs and changeups to opposite-handed hitters. The idea behind this is to throw a breaking pitch with movement that breaks away from the hitter, making it harder to hit. Right-on-right changeups were regarded as a dangerous pitch since a mistake almost always ended up with the pitch being barreled.

In 2013, Ben Lindbergh wrote an article for Baseball Prospectus about the Tampa Bay Rays (because who else besides Joe Maddon and Andrew Friedman) and their increased usage of same-sided changeups (this article includes left-on-left changeups as well). However, the team refused to recognize this increased same-sided changeup usage as an intentional move, but rather tried to classify it as an increase in the emphasis on throwing changeups to all hitters regardless of handedness. As a team in 2013, the Rays led the league in percent of same-sided changeups, as 15.9% of all pitches thrown to same-sided hitters were changeups. The league average was 5.4%. This league average has held relatively constant over the last four years. Using Statcast data from 2017 for all right-on-right pitches thrown by starting pitchers, 6.6% of all right-on-right pitches were changeups.

Back to Strasburg. Throwing his changeup 16.3% of the time to right-handed hitters, he generated a whiff rate of 27.2% while only allowing five hits and 13 other balls in play, on 213 changeups. Four of those five hits were singles, while the other was a home run hooked down the line by Josh Harrison (hit probability of 13%). He used his changeup primarily as an out pitch, as most were thrown down and in with two strikes. It totally makes sense for Strasburg to use his changeup so much, as it is one of the best pitches in baseball, and it really is its own animal. It’s unique because he throws it really hard. It was the second-hardest changeup among qualified starters, coming in at an average of 88.7 MPH. Despite throwing it so hard, it was 7 MPH slower than his average fastball, right in the ideal range of velocity differential. It also has a decent amount of arm-side run to go along with late and sharp drop (as can be seen here). According to the Pitch Values assigned by FanGraphs, Strasburg’s changeup was fifth best among qualified starters in total value, and 10th best on a per-pitch basis.

In his Game 1 start, Strasburg threw six right-on-right changeups out of 45 pitches (13.3%) and generated four whiffs with zero balls in play. This was right in line with his season averages, which would’ve been expected to continue in Game 4. But this was not the case. It was reported on Tuesday that Strasburg was sick and would not pitch on Wednesday despite being on regular rest after the rainout. Yet, on Wednesday morning, plans changed and he was announced as the Game 4 starter with the Nationals season on the line. As mentioned earlier, he did his job by turning in a spectacular start, and the Nationals’ season lived to see another day. However, in Game 4 Strasburg decided to get funky. He threw 16 right-on-right changeups out of 45 pitches, equal to a whopping 35.6% of the time, and generated eight whiffs with one ball in play hit at 27.7 MPH. His changeup and its increased usage was no doubt a huge factor in shutting down the Cubs once again (as can be seen here, here, and here). Who knows why he decided to go to it so much more often. Maybe he saw the success he had with it in Game 1, or maybe that pitch was the most comfortable for him to throw while supposedly not feeling well (his average fastball velocity of 95.4 MPH suggests he was feeling just fine). No matter what it was, it doesn’t matter. Strasburg has proved that the right-on-right changeup can not only be an effective pitch, but an absolutely devastating one. A pitch that can even be used over a third of the time. Let’s see if hitters will be able to adjust.

Although this season for Giancarlo Stanton was one for the record books, this monumental display of power should not be enough to warrant a spot in the top 10 of baseball’s best position players.

While Stanton did have an impressive season to say the least, and with an NL MVP seemingly locked, he wasn’t even the best in the NL alone. With the NL being the easier of the two leagues, most certainly, it seemed that Stanton had every advantage there could’ve been given — aside from playing in Coors for 81 games.

Here’s how his 2017 season fared:

59 HR and 132 RBI paired with 32 2B. with a .281 / .376 / .631 slash line (1.007 OPS) 6.9 WAR / and a whopping 156 wRC+

Mind you, these numbers are indeed phenomenal, but they are not deserving of being named “Top 10” in baseball, let alone “NL MVP.” Giancarlo did what no one had done in over a decade, and that is hit 59 homers (Ryan Howard hit 58 in 2006). He surpassed every personal best of his entire career, and rewrote his own book — which was filled with injury questions, as well as his inability to hit for average.

However, factoring in the huge increase in the amount of home runs hit this season, Stanton’s monumental 59 is slightly less impressive.

% OF RUNS OFF OF HR

2017- 42.3 % (+2.1 %)

2016- 40.2 % (+2.9 %)

2015- 37.3 % ( / )

NUMBER OF HR HIT

2017- 6,105 (+495)

2016- 5,610 (+701)

2015- 4,909 ( / )

With this being known, there were 41 players with over 30 homers, as well as Kris Bryant, Bryce Harper, Jose Ramirez, and Mike Napoli being notched with 29.

Giancarlo Stanton’s career numbers should not boost him to the top-10 consideration, so why would one season justify such? Stanton is a career .268 hitter, and never hit more than 37 homers in a single go (although yes, he never played more than 150 games). Even with his AS recognition in 2014, in which he slugged 37 to pair with a 6.3 WAR season, he wasn’t even considered top-5 then. The drastic injuries that Stanton has faced, as well as his lack of defensive abilities and base-running abilities, mean his value is hurt. Even for the 2017 NL MVP, Stanton shouldn’t win.

59 HR- 1st in NL

132 RBI- 1st in NL

.281 AVG- 24th in NL

.376 OBP- 14th in NL

.631 SLG- 1st in NL

6.9 WAR- 2nd in NL

156 wRC+- 2nd in NL

Although Stanton did indeed have the edge in the majority of these categories, it is seen that aside from his impressive slugging percentage, he was not even top-10 in any other categories. If we’re being honest with each other, Anthony Rendon, Justin Turner, and Joey Votto all put together more impressive and stand-alone seasons.

Rendon- .301 / .403 / .533 slash with a 6.9 WAR and a 143 wRC+ over 605 PA at 3B

Turner- .322 / .415 / .530 slash with a 5.1 WAR and a 151 wRC+ over 533 PA at 3B

Votto- .320 / .454 / .578 slash with a 6.6 WAR (1B gets brutalized for WAR) and a 165 wRC+ over 707 PA (record number for walks taken in a season)

However, this discussion is not about whether or not Stanton should win MVP. It is whether or not Stanton should be considered a top-10 position player in the game of baseball. In my opinion the list currently stands as such:

1. Mike Trout
2. Jose Altuve
3. Bryce Harper
4. Paul Goldschmidt
5. Kris Bryant
6. Joey Votto
7. Josh Donaldson
8. Manny Machado
9. Buster Posey
10. Daniel Murphy

(with Rizzo, Judge, Lindor, Gary Sanchez, Freeman, Corey Seager, and Nolan Arenado in the territory)

The reasoning behind this list is both the strength of their position, as well as their career history and trajectories. Trout is easily the greatest player in the game, and shows no signs of slowing down. Altuve is the best infielder in the game right now, and I don’t see him ever hitting under .300 for the rest of his career. Harper is younger than Trout, and has already accomplished things that no player can imagine, and possesses five tools to his game. Goldschmidt, like Votto later on, is the epitome of consistency. Bryant, Donaldson, and Machado are all in a different breed of third basemen (Nolan not far behind) with their amazing offensive production, and defensive splits. Posey is the best catcher in baseball, and hits supremely well for average. And Daniel Murphy is the same as Posey, where he is a phenomenal contact hitter, with the power upside. With the other players in the area, all of them are young with upside, and their minor-league track records mixed with their current production at the major-league level lead me to believe they’re the real deal.

Stanton may barely crack T20 in my eyes. With the fact that he is too slow and lumbering in the basepaths, mixed with his horrid defensive splits (10 DRS, below average/ 6.7 UZR, below average/ -.5 dWAR), he’s a one-dimensional player. Stanton clearly is a generational talent, and possesses power like no other in baseball, but with his poor attitude and colossal contract, he should be labeled overrated. He is making nearly 30 million dollars per year, and for a player who has only surpassed a 6 WAR twice over his eight seasons, it makes you question how truly valuable he is.

According to Marlins new CEO and part owner, Derek Jeter, the Marlins are “in a rebuilding process,” which Stanton responded to with “I want no part in a rebuild.”

What does the future hold for Giancarlo Stanton and his massive $220 million that is due? The world will just have to sit back, relax, and enjoy the show.