nope, chosen purposefullyQuote:
Originally Posted by gut
faggot
Printable View
nope, chosen purposefullyQuote:
Originally Posted by gut
faggot
One more thing bitch (had to clarify as faggot is a meaningless term) I can remain sober longer than you and I will come to you to prove it,Quote:
Originally Posted by gut
for a price. That price is a simple bet. Even money.
You get what I mean I hope. I can take more than you or anyone I've known. Whether you want to infer "more than" as sobriety or the opposite is irrelevant.
I hope you get the sarcastic viewpoint here. If I started a 2019 Canadian Curling Tour draft thread, I would expect some heat. I'll leave you idiots to it but Jesus fucking Costanza it's pitiful
looks like the market has cooled on the harper $400-500M deal that seemed pretty inevitable before last year...
phillies owner said he'd spend stupid this offseason...he'd be smart to keep some of the powder dry and make that kinda offer to trout in 2021...trout might want to stay out west, who knows but the phillies should try it...ive mentioned before ive never seen anything like the traffic going into philly when the angels came to town a few years back...was fucking crazy...
supposedly the phillies are in the kluber market...would help solve the pitching problems...add harper's bat and you might have something...fuck machado...you think youre gonna get MORE hustle outta a guy after he signs a $20-25/year deal? like the beckham deal with the gaints...they had to, but now they gotta put up with his drama queen bullshit for the next 3-5 years...
I'm confused about the Dodgers deal today.
Kemp is due $21.5m in 2019, and that's it. Dodgers are already on the hook for $3.5m of that from the Kemp-to-SD trade, and they also assumed responsibility for $7m more here. So the Dodgers are only saving $11m by unloading him.
Alex Wood is in his final year of arbitration. It's estimated that he will get about $10m.
Yasiel Puig's 7-year deal with the Dodgers ended in 2018, but they had control of him for one more year, in arbitration. It's estimated that he would get about $11m.
Kyle Farmer would get something around $550k. For salary purposes, he is a non-factor, since he will be replaced by another player making the Major League minimum, thus a wash.
The Dodgers are getting two mediocre prospects, plus Homer Bailey who will be released.
Bailey is owed $23 million for 2019 and $25 million for 2020, but can be bought out of 2020 for $5 million. This means the Dodgers will eat $28 million by buying out his 2020 and then releasing him.
In real money savings, the Dodgers aren't getting very much. They shipped off about $32m in projected salary and received $28m back (of which $23m has to be paid this year).
However, the difference is that the Dodgers will only take a $17.5m luxury tax hit for the Bailey buyout in 2019, while shedding $32m, meaning that they are saving about $14.5m in luxury tax overall.
This still doesn't leave them with enough room to sign Harper without going over the 2019 luxury tax threshold, so I don't completely understand this deal.
They also save a piddling $4 million overall in the entire affair, ignoring the luxury tax implications.
At the same time, they lose 3 players who would have had real value on the 2019 roster, and get no one useful in return.
Yes, I understand that the Dodgers needed to clear an OF spot if they wanted to go after Harper. Yes, I know the Dodgers were unlikely to want to re-sign Wood in 2020. Yes, I know Puig has been a headache during his tenure with the Dodgers. Yes, I know that Matt Kemp is unlikely to repeat his first half of 2018, and could be a liability in 2019.
Still, I would think Puig and Wood still had enough trade value (especially Wood) to where the Dodgers could have found a team to take these three payers WITHOUT returning a contract albatross like Bailey.
Had Bailey not been part of the deal, this would have made sense, even with the Dodgers shipping $7m cash to cover part of Kemp's salary. The Dodgers would shed $32m in salary, and get rid of players who aren't likely to be Dodgers in 2020 anyway. This would clear enough cap room to where they could sign Harper and not go over.
The trade where Kemp was acquired in 2018 made a lot more sense, as it was an exchange of bad contracts, but it allowed the Dodgers to get under the cap that year.
Here the Dodgers won't be under the cap if they sign Harper, AND they are giving away useful players while not receiving anyone useful in return (or even any good prospects).
In short, I'm not a fan of this trade.
BTW, if Harper doesn't come to LA, there's still a contingency plan.
Recall that the Dodgers got unexpected production from Max Muncy, and need to fit him into their starting lineup in 2019. With no Harper, they will put Muncy at 1B, move Bellinger to OF (where he actually plays pretty well), and then round out the outfield with Joc Pederson and some platoon of Andrew Toles/Kike Hernandez/Alex Verdugo. Then Chris Taylor will be moved to 2B, and they'll worry about catcher a bit later, perhaps just filling it with a junk player from within until Keibert Ruiz is ready in 2020. Alternately, Taylor and Hernandez could swap, with Taylor being OF and Hernandez being 2B.
So the starting position players would look like:
C ???
1B Muncy
2B Taylor / Hernandez
3B Turner
SS Seager
LF Pederson
CF Bellinger
RF Toles/Verdugo/Hernandez/Taylor
Starting pitching-wise, they'd have:
Kershaw
Buehler
Hill
Ryu
Maeda / Urias
Relieving, they'd have:
Maeda/ Urias
Floro
Fields
Alexander
Baez
Kelly
Jansen
On the bench, they'd have:
Some backup catcher
Freese
Toles
Verdugo
Some middle infieder
So they had enough depth to where they could still field a good team, even without a major signing.
Is this a championship team, as constructed? Probably not. Is it good enough to win the NL West again? Most likely.
But keep in mind that Walker Buehler is still getting better, Julio Urias was pretty damn good in October and may finally be ready to live up to the previous hype, and Corey Seager is coming back.
I'm still not understanding why they'd sign the moderately expensive Kelly when they already had plenty of middle relief, if the goal is to get under the cap. But sometimes the Dodgers front office really confuses me.
I think it was a smart move by the Dodgers, but you cant really judge it until the moves that come afterwards happen. But for now, besides the soft-cap money games, the trade is about maximizing value. Kemp (despite his decent first 2 months last year) and Bailey are nothings with negative trade value. Puig and Wood are final year rentals. So ultimately the question Friedman asks himself is "Are we going to extend either of these guys?". We've known the answer on Puig for years now. Wood....meh, good player but they have depth there. Might as well get some prospects. Any team with continued success is gonna struggle to keep a decent system without making moves like this.
Downs and Gray aren't exactly nothing either. High picks with some upside, just young. Those are about the best "decent" prospects you'll get. The Vlad jr's of the game aint getting traded anymore, unless there is Chris Sale or the like going back.
For the future moves, if I were a Dodger fan, i'd prefer they sign Pollock and then trade for either Realmuto or Kluber/Bauer than sign Harper.
I agree with a lot of this (including the preference of Kluber and another good player over Harper), but I disagree that Kemp/Bailey is just a bad contract swap. Not really a fan of Pollock at this point, btw. Too injury prone.Quote:
Originally Posted by gut
Dodgers are picking up $28m worth of completely dead money in Bailey (he has to be released, according to agreement), and are only sending away $11m in semi-dead money with Kemp. I'll agree Kemp isn't worth $11m, but he's not worthless. Puig and Wood are final year guys at this point, but they're good enough (Puig especially) to where they had positive trade value.
If the purpose was to clear space, they could have done better.
confused i'll say--you missed Caleb Ferguson as a relief pitcher, Austin Barnes as starting catcher (for now), and counted both Toles & Verdugo as RF & bench players....Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
still, your points about seeming senselessness of the trade are well taken
Your idiots at Caesars have posted MLB win totals futures today Druff.
Just think about the prudence of setting a line now. Harper, Machado, Kluber etc etc.
To get your mind right I suggest you read some Dodgers porn. These guys LIKE the Dodgers. I am unencumbered by that problem.
Dodgersway.com Dodgers: Time to Change the Strategy and get Aggressive
https://dodgersway.com/2019/01/08/do...ange-strategy/
You and I learned something about ownership recently. Whose money this really is and why value is more than just a fashion statement in LA. It’s fiduciary responsibility. No one likes prison.
Anyway, I made money on Dodgers under last year. You didn’t. You have another chance.
Caesars set the Dodgers line at 95. Lol.
My Vegas proxy is gone. Maybe you can buy me some.
Beats clipping coupons. yw
First blush - cardinals and Phillies overs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sanlmar
As constructed, Dodgers probably are under 95 wins but not by a lot. I'd say a more fair line is 93. They still win the division, barring a surprising season from the Dbacks or Rockies.
They lack depth now since that stupid trade. Injuries can kill them this year if they happen.
The number is not 93 but 88.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
Left side of infield is going to be awful. Much worse than recently. This is just one example. There is an element of hope (Harper/Kluber) that is built in and I will happily fade that.
If the Dodgers give the blind kid 10 years I’ll piss myself laughing. Dodgers will have to get the MLB to allow a service dog in the outfield.
I got down. Caesars only taking $1000. This is just CZR promotional game playing. Not a serious offering.
Free money though
Left side of the infield is Turner/Seager. What's wrong with that?Quote:
Originally Posted by Sanlmar
Honestly the real Achilles heel of the team is potential injury and lack of depth to cover it.
They do have 7 guys who can be starting pitchers: Kershaw, Buehler, Hill, Ryu, Maeda, Urias, and Stripling. So even if two of those guys are injured, they're okay.
Offensively, they'll have problems if they experience injuries, unless they either get some surprising production out of Verdugo/Toles, or unless they come up with another Chris Taylor or Max Muncy who contributes big unexpectedly.
Speaking of Muncy, he's a candidate for regression, as are Joc Pederson and Kike Hernandez. Also, we don't fully know yet what to expect of Seager.
I still think this team is good enough to win the NL West, as constructed at the moment.
Pete Seager had TJ. He will not be better than before. Especially at the plate. I will book mark this post. You will be seeing it a lot.
Turner is aging badly and his mobility was comical last year. I think there is a prospect out there who may take over. Vague memory.
Kike is magical. Has hurt me more than any Dodger.
Pitching - Buehler, Urias could be special and carry an otherwise very average lineup
Turner was a little above average defensively in 2018, according to advanced metrics: https://www.baseball-reference.com/p...01-field.shtmlQuote:
Originally Posted by Sanlmar
He will be 34 for the entire 2019 season, but he hit at a high level for the past 5 seasons, and hasn't shown much sign of regression. It probably helps that he was only a part time player until 2015, thus preventing as much wear on his body. Most players peak around 27 and then start a slow decline. Turner has been an exception.
Urias was a very pleasant surprise in October. He came back from a season-long injury (one which extended from the season before) and major surgery, and I figured he was a has-been before even getting going. Even when healthy, he was inconsistent at the ML level.
Then he looked excellent -- pretty much exactly the pitcher the Dodgers had hoped he would be. This was in relief, but still.
If Urias and Buehler kick ass in 2019, that alone should probably be enough to hand the Dodgers the NL West, and perhaps more.
Two much-maligned 2018 Dodgers have signed with other teams.'
Yasmani Grandal has signed with the Brewers. He had a horrid postseason in both 2017 and 2018, and simply seems to be worn down by the time October comes.
Brian Dozier, once thought to be the Dodgers' solution at 2B when they almost acquired him a few years ago, finally made it to the team in mid-2018, and was pretty much an automatic out. He signed with the Nationals.
Manny Machokedo is also clearly not returning to LA.
Love the Brewers. They were one game alway against Dodgers and would have matched up better against Sawks in WS
Dodgers down to 94 wins from 95 - more coming as front office reality hits the public
Diamondbacks and Rockies both rose. Padres fell
I am imagining Druff seeing a headline reading "Dodgers trade for catcher" and then the gigantic sigh when seeing it was for Martin and not Realmuto.
Manny Machokedo has an 8-year offer from the awful White Sox. Does he take it? Depends if he cares about being on a good team.
Right now Philadelphia has become the favorite to grab Harper, with the Nationals second. The Dodgers are third, but it is starting to look less likely.
Brewers still have a starting pitching problem.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sanlmar
They don't have anything resembling an ace.
Projected rotation is Chacin/Anderson/Davies/Woodruff/Nelson. Believe it or not, Nelson is the one with the potential to have "ace" stuff, but so far he's been inconsistent and is coming off of a lost season due to injury.
They have a killer bullpen -- Hader, Knebel, Burnes, Jeffress... but the NL Central is going to be a real dogfight again.
Still no signing of Harper or Machado.
People are wondering why.
Kris Bryant, perhaps seeing the writing on the wall when his own free agency comes up, is frustrated: http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/2...-manny-machado
So is Evan Longoria:
https://instagram.com/p/BsyUZScney4/
So why is this?
My theory is that two factors are coming together to push teams away from Harper and Machado.
The first is the general reluctance these days for teams to sink huge money into free agents for many years, even when they're only 26 like Harper and Machado. Teams are coming around to believe that developing young talent and then plugging holes with short contracts is the much more prudent way to go, as it carries far less risk.
But there's more to it.
The other problem is simply that neither player is a sure thing.
Machado killed his own value while with the Dodgers, showing everyone how he doesn't care about hustling, and also didn't perform particularly well with the team, especially in the postseason. Machado was supposed to be a game changer for the Dodgers, but they seemed to win the NL in spite of him, not because of him. The other problem is that he's only a .282 lifetime hitter with a career .822 OPS. Good numbers, sure, but not spectacular. And while he could have extra value playing shortstop, the problem is that nobody knows if he's any good at the position. He sucked at SS with the Orioles, but was actually very good with the Dodgers. I think Manny's hustling issues and other potential baggage pulls down his value enough to where he's simply not all that exciting to bring into any squad, especially because his offensive numbers are good rather than great.
Bryce Harper has battled recent injury problems AND has hit under .250 for two of the past three seasons. He seems to also choke under pressure (which also seems to plague Machado, from what we've seen). Harper also doesn't have a particularly easygoing personality, and there's some concern about his effect on the clubhouse. While I believe Harper has a lot more potential superstar upside than Machado, he's also a big injury risk for any team giving him huge money, and it's also hard to justify throwing $300m+ on a guy who hit sub-.250 in two of the past three years. Also, his defense has declined, for some reason.
Bottom line is both of these guys are useful players, but they're not worth breaking the bank over at this point. If either were super-elite once-in-a-generation hitters, they'd be getting the gigantic paycheck they had hoped for. But both guys are flawed, and nobody wants to invest THAT much money on them.
The players' union hates to talk about it, but it's honestly time for a complete restructuring of salaries in MLB.
The productive young players are completely underpaid, while the free agents -- many over 30 -- are/were grossly overpaid.
This needs to be fixed somehow.
I realize that young, cheap players are the only way smaller market teams can compete, and there also has to be some incentive for teams to maintain a good farm system. Remember, for every super-productive guy making the Major League minimum, there are tons of others who got big signing bonuses out of high school, and flopped.
However, I think there needs to be some kind of pay-for-performance type thing, where young phenoms are allowed to make more money before they're arbitration eligible, whereas the union concedes that the days of free agents getting huge contracts are over, save for a few really elite players.
The current system is also unsustainable long term, as once the cable TV contracts expire, the teams will never get such lucrative contracts again, thus greatly diminishing the money they have to invest in payroll.
another factor is those mega deals that were given around 5-6 years ago have not aged well:Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
*albert pujols, yikes...just turned 39, 3 days ago and the angels still owe him $87M over the next 3 years...
*miggy Cabrera, beyond yikes...turns 36 in mid-april and the tigers are still on the hook for $154M over the next 5 years and possibly $184M or $214M over the next 6 or 7...the 6th year vests if he finishes top 10 in the MVP balloting in '23 and the 7th vests for the same thing in '24...
*robby cano...this one has aged fairly well, but cano was on the fucking juice...let's see what happens over the next couple of years...
you might be able to give Bryce a pass on the defense due to him not wanting to punt off his big paycheck by getting hurt busting his ass on D...amazing, thought for sure he was gonna get $40+/year after that MVP season...now it will be interesting if somebody breaks the bank for him at 30 per...can't imagine boras' ego not letting him get harper a bigger contract than Stanton...
a HUGE if, is trout...that's a guy worth breaking the bank for...he's definitely a generational talent, not a clubhouse cancer, busts his ass, appears to be overall decent enough guy...only problem is him getting hurt before FA...said this many times in this thread, don't know why philly would go after harper/Manny when they could make that blowout offer to trout after 2020...
This came up after the HOF vote.
Quote:
In human history, fewer people have driven on the 405 than have scored an earned run off of Clayton Kershaw in the postseason.
It’s that time of year to make a bet that gives you joy and bragging rights all summer.
Let’s start with our annual under ATM
Mobile - MLB Regular Season Wins - Los Angeles Dodgers - Under +94½ Wins -115
This is my favorite by far. Ironically, Dodgers made them better with Puig, Kemp. Hot prospects will arrive soon. Pitching thumbs up.
Mobile - MLB Regular Season Wins - Cincinnati Reds - Over +77½ Wins -115
Unfortunately for JSizzle the Royals are not a .500 team. They have maybe one legit MLB player. Worst team in MLB.
Just noticed Kansas is misspelled in the prop. Royals prolly gave the Dodgers the second “s” in Kansas.
Mobile - MLB Regular Season Wins - Kansa City Royals - Under +69½ Wins -115
Gimme some more boys.
There's the Pollock to the Dodgers I figured would happen. Now looking to add Realmuto as the double-dip there as opposed to one of Machado/harper. Smart IMO.
Easy to see the Dodgers coming up with the best package for Miami also, being that the rumors were they wanted not just low-level prospects. 1 of their 2 good catching prospects, Pederson (if Miami wants him) + a pitching prospect. Miami probably wants Verdugo over Joc but who knows.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sanlmar
With ya on the Royals and Reds.
Really like Arizona under 77 and Toronto under 76.5 also. Neither of those teams should be making any significant FA signings of the big guys left. AZ still has a good rotation but that lineup is shit now. baby Vlad will have to produce like peak Arod at 3B for the Blue Jays to even sniff .500
Orioles under 59 probably smart also. They are at step 0.5 of this rebuild, and even the 47 win season last year might not be the nut low. When the Astros bottomed out 8 years ago, they went 56 wins, 55, then 51 before getting up to 70 in 2014. I seriously could see Baltimore winning like 43 games this year.
Toronto end of last season was still prolific on offense. I’ll look into it.
I made the Dodgers bet last night. Pollock is concerning. I didn’t know until you posted.
The left side of infield is going to be a disaster. I’m calling it.
Dodgers defense was bad last year. That’s my eye test not stats. They will be worse especially w/o Machado
I will look at Arizona.
under 94 looks like a smart play...rest of the division looks so weak that Dodgers may ease up late in season and still win title...no other NLW team projects to more than 82 wins....biggest risk is San Diego prospects arrive a year earlier than expectedQuote:
Originally Posted by Sanlmar
Here's the ESPN article about it: http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/2...sign-s-dodgersQuote:
Originally Posted by gut
I agree that it was smart to avoid Harper. Too many question marks surrounding the guy. Will he remain healthy? Why has he hit under .250 in two of the past 3 years?
Just not enough certainty to give huge money to a guy like that. Would much rather give it to a guy like Mike Trout, whose success going forward seems more predictable.
I'm not impressed with Verdugo. Maybe he'll break out and I'll look foolish, but to me he looks like one of those guys who is supposed to be good, but just won't be able to ever really crush Major League pitching.
Peterson + an okayish pitching prospect or Verdugo + that prospect would be fine, in exchange for Realmuto.
Pollock has plenty of an injury history himself, and he's 31. When he's healthy, he can really mash, but he's not durable at all.
The Giants made a good signing in Pomeranz for $1.5 million. Could end up being useless, but for that type of money, a guy like him is worth the gamble, especially because he had a few good years prior to going to Boston, and was very highly regarded as recently as mid-2016. Big fan of the low-risk/high-upside signings.
Not coincidentally, Farhan Zaidi was behind the Pomeranz signing, just as he was behind acquiring Chris Taylor and Max Muncy, two nobodies who have made big impacts on the Dodgers in the past 2 years.
I still think machado joins the white sox, but with word the Padres are in now also that would be a fun fit. Even if they give him 30m a year they have the budget room to do so, and will have rookie contract top prospects at 2B and SS for the next few years to even it out.
White Sox are obviously in a similar spot, just at different positions. This might start becoming like the NFL where the new team-building strat is have a good QB on a rookie deal and then spend around that, in baseball it will be "spend big right before your big prospects get promoted".
Realmuto about to go to the Phillies. In return, Miami will get top pitching prospect Sixto Sanchez and catcher Jorge Alfaro, plus one of the following: Mickey Moniak, Alec Bohm, Adonis Medina, or Adam Haseley.
awful, awful deal for the phillies. who is their jackass GM?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
just doesn't make sense imo.
why would you give up your #1 pitching prospect in this deal..including him is a really, really bad decision.....as for alfaro,,,,,, he might close the gap on realmuto as well being he's relatively young for a catcher .
it's not like he was awful that needed an upgrade at this expense. alfaro calls a good game as well
the phillies GM is panicking. i just researched who he was and one reporter said he's on the hot seat and it's scorching. in that sense this trade makes sense. wtf does he care if sixto becomes and ace. it's possible he won't even be the GM for philly in 3 years. this is a short term upgrade with the bat.....Quote:
Originally Posted by mulvaawful, awful deal for the phillies. who is their jackass GM?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
just doesn't make sense imo.
why would you give up your #1 pitching prospect in this deal..including him is a really, really bad decision.....as for alfaro,,,,,, he might close the gap on realmuto as well being he's relatively young for a catcher .
it's not like he was awful that needed an upgrade at this expense. alfaro calls a good game as well
scary part is you can't 100% say realmuto will outperform alfaro next year. i mean. it seems like it will and he could be a huge addition, but there is risk as well as plenty of equilibrium between the two....not even factoring losing ur #1 pitching prospect
what's real funny is you can't rule out realmuto following in matt wieters trajectory path
this move all but cements philly outbidding everyone for either harper or machado. i would be willing to bet money on it. does any sportsbook offer odds?
phillies should hire elton brand as their gm so they wont make these retarded trades in the future
I agree the Philies gave up too much, especially given that they already had a decent 25-year-old catcher with further upside.
Realmuto landing with the Phillies also makes the Dodgers look bad.
As gut mentioned earlier, the Pollock signing was seen as the Dodgers mostly giving up on Harper, with the belief that Pollock/Realmuto would be a better (and less financially committing) addition than Harper alone.
But the Dodgers didn't get Realmuto, and it leaves them with a rather unimpressive result for the offseason, assuming no more major moves occur.
They lost Yasiel Puig, Alex Wood, and Matt Kemp.
They gained Joe Kelly, AJ Pollock, and Russell Martin.
Seems like a net loss in production, unless AJ Pollock stays really healthy and rakes at the plate.
They didn't save money, either. The Puig/Wood/Kemp trade saved them a whopping $4 million (not kidding), and netted them just two mid-level prospects.
Joe Kelly got 3 years, $25 million. AJ Pollock got 5 years/$60m. They got Martin for 1 year and $3.6m.
So they're paying substantially more than last year, and have a worse team, even ignoring the existing players whether they get better or worse.
They're probably still winning the NL West because no opponent looks particularly good in that division.
Also, Seager is coming back, and Buehler/Urias may both have big years on the mound (especially Buehler).
Fans can ignore bad front office moves if the team still wins.
Keep in mind that I don't always criticize the Dodgers front office.
I loved the Kemp move last year. They shed a bunch of useless players in a salary swap for Kemp (who still seemed -- and was -- productive), PLUS got under the luxury tax via that trade, so they actually saved real money. Brilliant.
This year they did the opposite. They traded away productive players for mostly shit in return, saved almost no money, and then made two multi-year signings which appear to be a bad deal.
And yes, I understand that Kemp/Wood/Puig were all in final years of their contracts, and none were likely to return, except maybe Kemp at a large discount.
But still.. if you think you are contending (which, as a back-to-back World Series participant, you definitely are), then you need to play for now, which means you don't ship away 3 productive players unless you're getting something useful in return.
And there was nothing useful.
Almost no money savings, no useful existing players, and no top-rated prospects.
not arguing with what I bolded above, but if you are hitting the panic button then why are you letting harper and/or machado languish out there on the FA market...I still think he has to sign one of them, but there is that nagging thing in the back of my mind they want to try to make a run at trout...Quote:
Originally Posted by mulvathe phillies GM is panicking. i just researched who he was and one reporter said he's on the hot seat and it's scorching. in that sense this trade makes sense. wtf does he care if sixto becomes and ace. it's possible he won't even be the GM for philly in 3 years. this is a short term upgrade with the bat.....Quote:
Originally Posted by mulva
scary part is you can't 100% say realmuto will outperform alfaro next year. i mean. it seems like it will and he could be a huge addition, but there is risk as well as plenty of equilibrium between the two....not even factoring losing ur #1 pitching prospect
what's real funny is you can't rule out realmuto following in matt wieters trajectory path
this move all but cements philly outbidding everyone for either harper or machado. i would be willing to bet money on it. does any sportsbook offer odds?
there is definitely an urgency to win here now...I don't think ill ever be able to get 10th row seats for a Friday game the same day for $10...those were the days...
In the meantime....
MLB has decided that the term "disabled list" is offensive to handicapped people, so now it's called the "handicapable list".
No, just kidding, but they did rename it to the "injured list" for that reason.
Dumb.
https://sports.yahoo.com/mlb-changes...004157739.html
the phillies need a professional hitter. they didn't have 1 player that could get a big hit last year..Quote:
Originally Posted by GambleBotsChafedPenisnot arguing with what I bolded above, but if you are hitting the panic button then why are you letting harper and/or machado languish out there on the FA market...I still think he has to sign one of them, but there is that nagging thing in the back of my mind they want to try to make a run at trout...Quote:
Originally Posted by mulva
there is definitely an urgency to win here now...I don't think ill ever be able to get 10th row seats for a Friday game the same day for $10...those were the days...
as for druffs comments on puig and pollock...pug really must have worn out his welcome. the dodgers seem to be going to an all white team. lol
as for pollock ..ehhhhh. hes a hustling scrapper and prolly a great team guy. obv he's from connecticut. still,...his stats could fall off a cliff starting as early as this yr as well. pug was pretty talented player
I was just sitting here watching my NBA under head towards a loss, and I thought of something.
A solution to the MLB free-agents-not-getting-signed problem.
The issue isn't whether the owners will pay $30m/year for a star. They will.
The issue is getting roped into 10-year deals where the star is still making $30m when they're 35-40.
At the same time, the younger players are getting fucked to where some have super productive years in their rookie or sophomore season, yet they make under $600k, while some middling scrub gets $7-15m per year just because he's a free agent.
So I think the following should be agreed to:
- Nice increase in salary for any highly productive pre-arbitration player
- Small bump in arbitration salaries
- Free agents agree to short deals, in exchange for owners agreeing to spend good money on those short deals
For example, maybe give Bryce Harper 2 years, $75m-$80m instead of 10 years, $350m.
It's clear the owners don't want the 10-year mega deals anymore. The days of financially committing a fortune for a decade to one player seem to be over.
Maybe this is a good compromise?