Our writers disagree with me about Merrill Kelly, talk about the new jerseys, and share their opinions about Rafael Devers!
At the time of writing, it is May 9th. Is this a must win series against the Dodgers, or is it too early for that?
Preston: There’s no such thing as a must-win, until there is. No, this is not a must win. However, it feels like a must-win for us, and does not at all for the Dodgers. That’s the difference between fourth and first places. Realistically, even after last night, a split is the most likely option and one we should be satisfied with. Winning the series would be wonderful, sweeping would entirely change the mood of the fanbase.
James: I mostly agree with Spencer on this one. I do think that this is a series that, for the morale of the club, the team needs to at least pull a series split out of. If, by some miracle, they can sweep the Dodgers in this series, that will do amazing things for the collective mood of the fanbase. It would also continue to muddy the waters of the hyper-competitive NL West. What the team needs to avoid is being blown out the rest of the way in this series. That will be a very demoralizing time for the fans and also really start to put the pressure on Arizona to stop digging themselves a hole to climb out of for a second season in a row.
Spencer: While I appreciate the shout out, I believe James means Preston this week. I’m traveling and wasn’t first to answer.
DBacksEurope: Probably a bit too early to say it is a must-win, after all it is the Dodgers. I’d say the upcoming series against the Giants is a must-win and against the Rockies a must-sweep. Games against opponents from the NL West are double the stakes, especially in a race as tight as this division is.
Wesley: I would generally argue that no individual series is more important than another. However, the combination of the current standings, along with the fact that this is the first NL West opponent the Dbacks have faced this season makes it a golden opportunity.
Ben:
Spencer: No series is a must win against the Dodgers until the playoffs. The odds of overcoming them for the NL West are insurmountable. The upcoming series against the Rockies though? That’s a must win to prove we aren’t smoke and mirrors. Honestly given how horrid they are, I’ll be a bit disappointed if we can’t sweep them. Things happen and sweeps of bad teams are hard, but…
Makakilo: Spencer is on target! A Dodgers series win is optional. A sweep against the Rockies is achievable and it’s almost a must sweep!
Jim: I never had any real hopes of winning the division, so no. A split would be nice, but even a loss wouldn’t be the end of the world. Mind you, I could do without losses like Friday night’s. Those are bad enough against the Cubs, but against FTD?
Merrill Kelly has either been cramping or struggling, with very little in between. How worried are we?
Preston: I disagree strongly with this question. While there have been plenty of cramps, half of Kelly’s starts have been quality starts, one he didn’t go six innings because it was his first start, and two he didn’t go six innings because of cramps. He has literally one bad start: against the Yankees. In his other seven starts, his lowest game score is 55. Since the blow up against the Yankees, he’s pitched to a 3.02 FIP and 0.771 WHIP.
My only concern would be if he was changing his pitch mix as part of his anti-cramping agenda. Kelly’s fastball is one of the least valuable pitches in baseball, while his breaking and offspeed stuff is excellent. His first outing since the pickle plan did see him increase his fastball usage quite a bit, but I suspect that had more to do with the game plan.
The fact is, Kelly is very much the pitcher he has been. In 2023, he was hit hard 41.8% of the time. He’s always outperformed his numbers when taking into account quality of contact.
James: I think Kelly has rather firmly established the sort of pitcher he is. He has regularly outperformed his expected contribution and he, even through injuries, finds a way to eat innings. Sadly, his development took three extra years in Korea, and the Diamondbacks are now on the waning end of his time as an effective pitcher. I have few worries about him completing this season successfully, giving the Diamondbacks another 160 innings of above league average performance. I do have my concerns about how many more such seasons he has in him. Of all the up-coming free agents that Arizona has, I figure Kelly to be the most likely to return to Arizona. I would hope for something like a one or two year deal, maybe best as a one-year deal with an option for a second year.
DBacksEurope: I am a bit worried. He was injured a lot last season and is cramping quite a bit this season. He still pitches well the majority of the time he is out there. He could still be a valuable mid-rotation piece next year but we already have Rodriguez for that role.
Wesley: As far as the actual quality of his pitching, Merril Kelly has been slightly above average according to multiple different metrics (103 ERA+, 97 ERA-). The real issue is that having your starting pitcher abruptly leave the game puts the bullpen in a very bad position.
Ben:
Spencer: I’d be less worried if other pitchers were playing well. Kelly isn’t awful this season by any means, but he’s struggling and it’s exacerbated by the fact that Gallen and Burnes and ERod and Ginkel and JMart and Puk all are too.
Makakilo: No worries about Kelly.
Addendum: Let’s look at one fact that reflects positively on Kelly:
This season. he loaded the bases 1 time. Compare him to other Diamondbacks starters: Burnes 5 times, Gallen 4 times, Rodriguez 3 times, Nelson 3 times.
Jim: It would be nice for him to go deeper into games, but going into play Saturday, his 5.5 innings per start is actually better than MLB average (5.4). You’d think with all the cutting-edge medical support at our disposal, they would be able to find the cause and fix it.
Dbacks have finally taken the field with their new City Connect jerseys. Now that you’ve seen them under the bright lights, what are your final thoughts?
James: Meh. I still like the sandy one better.
DBacksEurope: It hurts my eyes. I can’t walk around in that, people would tell me where the hack I am going in a disco outfit like that.
Wesley: They’re alright, I’d wear one. I wish they’d do some nods towards the old pre-Dbacks minor league teams like the Phoenix Firebirds, or even the Tucson Toros.
Ben:
Spencer: On screen I think they look fine but out of place. In person they don’t pop and the color choices are drab, almost matted instead of the filter-accentuated shine we were led to believe they’d have. I was tepidly pleased when they released, and I’m slowly sinking into “man I miss the creativity of the tan” territory. Won’t keep me from watching and enjoying the games, but there’s zero chance I feel the urge to buy a jersey. I did grab a hat and am actively considering a hoodie though. Anything where the colors actually pop as expected I’m interested in.
Makakilo: Aaahhh, it’s too bright! Like James, I like the sandy one better!
Jim: My feelings on purple-based uniforms are already well-known. But after Friday night, I feel they are cursed, all evidence of them should be burned, and we should never speak of them again.
Rafael Devers is not pleased with his treatment in Boston right now. How much say do you think players should get in their positions, and is there a point where the team should tell them to just play ball?
Preston: I think it highly unadvisable to move a player to catcher without making sure the player is fine with it. Otherwise? You play where your coach tells you to play in youth ball, high school, and so on. If you’re not the best player, you’re not going to play shortstop. Devers was the best player on every team he was on growing up, but he should recognize that he no longer is.
Now if there is a psychological reason why he struggles to play first base, the team should take that into account and work with him on it. (Examples would include yips or fear of a collision.) Barring something like that (and why would he air grievances if it is something like that?) he needs to shut up and play ball. Otherwise, they might as well trade him to Pittsburgh, because he’s going to turn into a clubhouse cancer.
James is reminding me of an instance when a player who was a Hall of Famer and a legend with his team (probably still the single-most popular player in franchise history) saw his team sign another player at his position. But despite having over 9000 plate appearances with his organization, Craig Biggio not only moved positions, but went from the infield to the outfield after Jeff Kent was signed. He moved from center field to left field after Carlos Beltran was acquired. If any player has the right to make a demand on an organization, it’s Biggio on the Astros. Maybe if Devers had over 2000 hits and was the single-biggest homegrown star in franchise history (remember that Bagwell, Nolan Ryan, and Mike Scott all started elsewhere, and Berkman wasn’t as established yet) he could make some demands. But Biggio he ain’t, and even Biggio didn’t.
James: Short of asking a pitcher to play the field or vice versa, players should be playing where the manager tells them to. I will grant an exception for the position of catcher. Catchers need to have some sort of experience at least wearing the gear in a game situation. Outside of that, it is on the manager to deploy the team in a manner that gives the club the best chance to win. When you have Ryne Sandberg, Ozzie Smith, or Ken Griffey Jr. you play them at second, short, and center field respectively. When you have Edgar Martinez or David Ortiz, you have the team’s primary DH. When you’re athletic enough to play multiple positions and have a bat that makes an argument for playing 150+ games (but you aren’t the best at any position), you play where the manager tells you to. The promise made to Devers that he would be the full-time third baseman for the Red Sox, regardless of the winter roster development, was made by a front office that is no longer in charge for a reason. Devers should also be taking personal inventory and accepting the fact that Bregman is a far superior infield defender. That pushed Devers to DH. Now, the team needs a healthy body to man first. If Devers is interested in the club succeeding, he should be willing to take on the challenge of playing the least demanding position on the field. Besides, it’s likely that he still only plays about 70% of the games at first – if that much. Devers putting the team behind the eight ball when it comes to finding a healthy alternative for first base is the epitome of a player putting himself before the club.
DBacksEurope: Well, first of all, I don’t know what they promised him when he signed his extension in Boston. Secondly, I disagree that you just play where the coach tells you. Ketel did that and look at what that brought him: injuries, a weak center fielder and underperformance. A player needs to look out for himself as well. Devers has never played first base and maybe he is afraid to play that position. I also think Devers has an attitude and that doesn’t make things easier, but I also understand his frustration.
Wesley: On one hand, I do understand Devers frustration with being moved around the Diamondbacks, when obviously he’d prefer staying at his natural position. On the other hand, Devers was the worst third baseman defensively in the American League. Bregman is better offensively and defensively there, so of course, you’re going to prefer him over Devers at the hot corner. Aside from that, it’s a baseball TEAM, and he’s not being a team player.
Ben:
Spencer: He’s letting his ego and frustrations show in the public. That’s not good. I’m pleased to say our team doesn’t have players like that and when we accidentally do, we ship them away pretty quickly. However, I think some of his feelings might be justified assuming he was promised 3B at signing. That said, it’s just not my personality to act the way he has. I am always willing to help where necessary and learn a new task; it keeps me employed! But I’m also not guaranteed hundreds of millions of dollars regardless of if I comply. I think this is a failure of the team to create a culture where this type of obstacle is handled privately and a failure of the person to understand the world doesn’t revolve around them.
Makakilo: In most cases, the team is justified in telling players what position to play. Nevertheless, this case is different, and my sympathies are with Devers. My thoughts follow:
His contract runs for 9 more seasons (including 2025) for $284 Million. Going forward, it appears he is a 28-years old player who exclusively plays DH. Wow! That’s an expensive luxury that the Diamondbacks can’t afford.
From 2021 to 2024, he played third base with the exception of 3 games (two times at second base in 2021 and one time at shortstop in 2023).
In 2024, there were 8 third basemen with outs-above-average as-bad-as or worse than Devers. Perhaps Devers thought he could improve his defense.
In February, the Red Sox signed Alex Bregman to play third base for 1,2, or 3 seasons (depending on if and when Bregman opts out). Bregman is a better batter and a much better defender at third base. Devers must have noticed that Bregman plays third base!
Per MLBTR, Devers “had been promised by the club that he could stay at the hot corner for the long term.” That broken promise must have stung!
This last week, Devers, as relayed through his translator, said they told him to play DH and “put away my glove.” This season he has only played DH.
This season, FanGraphs’ Depth Chart projects the Red Sox will win 84 games, giving them realistic (albeit small) playoff chances. My conclusion is that in a future season if Devers returns to third base, the team will be rebuilding and it will no longer have playoff chances.
There is a reason this team-player disagreement became public. Perhaps he wants to be traded to a team that honors its promises, or a team with better long-term playoff chances, perhaps with chances to reach the World Series.
If you could choose anything, what historical moment in time would you visit and why?
Preston: I’m realistic, and I know that most of my lifespan has been a better time for most things than most of human history. If I could be guaranteed health, I might go be a factory worker in the 1940s or 1950s, but let’s be honest, that time sucked for a whole lot of people and thinking that is basically white male privilege.
So instead, I’d choose to go back to the 90s as an adult and live through what will likely go down as the peak of American prosperity with the ability to actually take advantage of it. It’s the only time in American history when a decent number of groups had civil rights and there wasn’t a massive war going on.
James: I’m a white male with advanced studies in both hard sciences and the liberal arts. I would fit in swimmingly around the turn of the Twentieth Century, assuming that I could avoid the Spanish Flu and the wars. Also, the pace of the world wasn’t what it is today. I do think I was probably born about 75-100 years later than I was supposed to be. If not that, then probably simply going back and reliving the period I grew up in, but hopefully taking better advantage of the opportunities that arise.
DBacksEurope: A historical moment is a certain moment, not a time period. I would love to see my parent’s wedding, my grandparent’s wedding etc etc so I can put a picture to all names I have in my genealogical research. But those moments are not historical. If I would need to choose a historical moment, I’d probably pick a moment where the prehistoric paintings were made in Lascaux and have a chat with the painter or painters to find out the who, what, where, when, why and how. I could also go back to 1998 when Dennis Bergkamp scored the winning goal in the World Cup Quarter final against Argentina in the final minute. Never again have I experienced such an explosion of joy, happiness and partying in The Netherlands. People went crazy in the streets.
Wesley: I would just go back to the late 90s. Sadly, ‘The Matrix’ may just have had it right when they called the year 1999 the peak of human civilization. There’s tons of different historical eras that I would love to go to, if I wasn’t limited by too many language barriers. Perhaps I’d go back to the first century CE and show Hero of Alexandria that there are many, many more applications to his aeolipile than simple children’s toys. I suppose I could muck about in Judea and go see what all the fuss is about while I’m in that period. Becoming fluent in Latin and Greek can’t be that hard.
Ben:
Spencer: I would like to go back to (Shrove) Tuesday March 4, 1930 in New Orleans, Louisiana (the backwards L state for any unfamiliar with individual US states). I wrote my thesis in college on Mardi Gras and the significance/meaning of parades. This particular year and day intrigue me for several reasons. Firstly, the celebrations that year were large and opulent but showcased the fear about the recent Stock Market crash. Even the largest and most affluent, elitist groups were worried and publicly showing it. But secondly and perhaps more importantly, I want to see the krewe Zulu perform their parade. An all-Black American parading group, they deftly navigated the racism and need for entertainment to solidify themselves as a powerhouse organization that remains at the top of the heap even today. It started with the 1930 parade when no one stopped them from making fun of themselves and that quickly led to the expectation they’d parade alongside the largest all-White and all-Creole krewes on Mardi Gras Tuesday itself. By the time their biggest opponents even realized they were a threat, it was too late.
The themes on parade that day would be:
- Rex: “King of the Druids” – a magical callback to better, less difficult times
- Comus: “Legends of Faust” – a literary interpretation of the hellfire everyone now knew was coming and would last an indeterminate amount of time
- Zulu: “N/A” – a needed comedic interpretation of the black man’s struggle coming to North America as slaves having been kings in their home territories
Makakilo: I just watched the movie The Gathering Storm. It’s about Winston Churchill in the political wilderness and speaking against the future danger from England’s actions in the context that Germany was secretly rearming. It’s about discerning truth when Germany’s political lies are common-place. On a personal level, it’s also about Churchill’s perseverance in the face of personal setbacks and difficulties. From my perspective, I liked that although he saw war in the future, he had optimism that England would win. Perhaps a moment when I could hear Churchill’s thoughts when he worked and reworked his words with his secretary on a future speech.
Spencer: Mak, in Fulton, Missouri you can go to the US National Winston Churchill museum! It’s pretty cool. He gave the Iron Curtain speech there and his daughter’s artwork using the Berlin Wall is there too. Let me know if you ever go, I know the curators and can probably get you access to some of the hidden exhibits that aren’t always out!
Makakilo: Thanks Spencer! Now, it’s on my list of places that I really want to visit!
Jim: Historical events? They’re vastly overrated. I’d head for the late eighties, after I first moved to London. I would have a lot more fun, knowing what I do now. Let’s leave it at that, shall we? 🙂