| 0 |
Subject: 2011 MLB Hot Stove Talk
Posted by: Great One
- [4110471110] Thu, Nov 11, 2010, 11:49
A general thread for off season talk for those of us who don't only want to discuss the Yankees.
Where do you see the following FA's headed?
Carl Crawford
Jayson Werth
Cliff Lee
Adrian Beltre
Adam Dunn
Victor Martinez
Rafeal Soriano
and play Fantasy GM of your favorite team and tell us what they should do!
what moves would you make? |
| Only the 50 most recent replies are currently shown. Click on this text to display hidden posts as well. |
| 36 | Species
Dude
ID: 07724916
Thu, Dec 09, 2010, 01:16
|
Red Sox = evil empire.....just buying free agents and trading for All-Stars that the poor teams can't afford.
Bastards.
|
| 37 | Khahan
ID: 373143013
Thu, Dec 09, 2010, 10:08
|
Glad to have Crawford on the Red Sox. Not so glad to have a contract of that length or that price on the Red Sox.
|
| 38 | Skidazl
ID: 3253219
Thu, Dec 09, 2010, 16:04
|
Angels always suck in the meetings. Nothing left now.
We'll probably end up overpaying for Beltre...
Werth was a much better fit in Boston, IMHO, and though his contract is outrageous, it is still a lot less than what crawford got. LF in Fenway is too small to showcase Crawford's defensive skills.
|
| 39 | Mith
ID: 371138719
Fri, Dec 17, 2010, 00:51
|
NYT:
Red Sox sign Bobby jenks for 2 years/$12m.
Cubs sign Wood for 1 season at $1.5m, way down from the $12m fir 2 years he was reportedly asking.
Nats trade Willingham to Oakland for prospects.
According to Buster Olney, citing two unnamed sources, the Jenks deal moves the current Red Sox payroll past the Yankees. Though the Yankees will still likely add at least 1 SP, 2 RP and 1 or 2 bench players. Don't know if the Sox are done, I have to imagine they'd add a good catcher if one became available, not sure what else they might be looking at.
Anyway, as I previously noted in another thread, the Yankees budget advantage over other big market teams appears to be shrinking. Will be particularly interesting to see how the 2011 opening day payrolls look.
|
| 40 | Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 37838313
Sat, Dec 18, 2010, 14:16
|
Red Sox add Dan Wheeler to the pile for 1 year at $3m with a 2nd year vesting at the same salary if he notches 65 appearances.
|
| 41 | R9
ID: 2854239
Sun, Dec 19, 2010, 20:14
|
Like the Greinke trade for both teams, smart move for both given where they are at.
Mith, 39: Cmon. Seriously? Fine, the Sox caught the Yankees in payroll. Philly is a bit up there too. Anyone else in range? Anyone else even over 100 mil? Just give it a rest.
|
| 42 | Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 37838313
Sun, Dec 19, 2010, 23:39
|
Give what a rest? If I wrote something that you feel is untrue then lets hear it.
|
| 43 | Perm Dude
ID: 5510572522
Sun, Dec 19, 2010, 23:50
|
Hear hear r9. Last year the Yankees were #1 in Opening Day payroll by 21% over Boston. And about 29% over the Cubs at #3. In fact, about 10% of all MLB salary dollars spent on Opening Day 2010 were cut by the busy Yankee Accounts Payable Department.
With the Yankees yet to add players there should be no doubt the Fat Wallet Trophy is staying in the Bronx in 2011.
|
| 44 | Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 37838313
Mon, Dec 20, 2010, 01:11
|
Uh, sure. Here here. Really put the guy who neither said nor implied anything to the contrary in his place.
What I did say was that the advantage over other big market clubs was srinking. It takes notably more data than a comparison of the 2010 payrolls of 3 clubs to prove or disprove that statement. - Unless of course we apply on the FOX News Channel standard of proof.
|
| 45 | Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 37838313
Mon, Dec 20, 2010, 03:39
|
Shrinking advantage over other big market clubs.
For each year, Yankees payroll, followed by the next 5 teams in order, with the percentage amount their payroll was lower than the Yankees, followed by the average of those percentages.
2010:
Yankees: $206,333,389
Red Sox: $162,747,333 - 21%
Cubs: $146,859,000 - 29%
Phillies: $141,927,381 - 31%
Mets: $132,701,445 - 36%
Tigers: $122,864,929 - 40%
Average advantage: 31%
2009
Yankees: $201,449,189
Mets: $149,373,987 - 26%
Cubs: $134,809,000 - 33%
Red Sox: $121,745,999 - 40%
Tigers: $115,085,145 - 43%
Angels: $113,004,046 - 44%
Average advantage: 37%
2008
Yankees: $209,081,577
Mets: $137,793,376 - 34%
Tigers: $137,685,196 - 34%
Red Sox: $133,390,035 - 36%
White Sox: $121,189,332 - 42%
Angels: $119,216,333 - 43%
Average advantage: 38%
2007
Yankees: $189,639,045
Red Sox: $143,026,214 - 25%
Mets: $115,231,663 - 39%
Angels: $109,251,333 - 42%
White Sox: $108,671,833 - 43%
Dodgers: 108,454,524 - 43%
Average advantage: 38%
2006
Yankees: $194,663,079
Red Sox: $120,099,824 - 38%
Angels: $103,472,000 - 47%
White Sox: $102,750,667 - 47%
Mets: $101,084,963 - 48%
Dodgers: $98,447,187 - 49%
Average advantage: 46%
All figures pulled from USA Today, don't know if they are opening day or final payrolls.
Maybe the #s 2 thru 6 teams will average more than 31% lower than the Yankees' payroll in 2011 (tho it does seem unlikely given the Red Sox and Phillies actvity this year). Regardless, at least for the time being, an undenyable trend is an undenyable trend, Gretchen.
Funny thing is, anyone who honestly cares about league parity the good of the game more than they care about their victim complex and having a good reason to hate the Yankees should see this as very good news rather than a reason to attack the messenger.
Can I get a "Here Here!"?
I didn't think so.
|
| 47 | Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 37838313
Mon, Dec 20, 2010, 07:27
|
Sorry, finishing up an overnight shift...
Looks like 2005 was the peak:
2005
Yankees: $208,306,817
Red Sox: $123,505,125 - 41%
Mets: $101,305,821 - 51%
Angels: $97,725,322 - 53%
Phillies: $95,522,000 - 54%
Cardinals: $92,106,833 - 56%
Average advantage: 51%
2004
Yankees: $184,193,950
Red Sox: $127,298,500 - 31%
Angels: $100,534,667 - 45%
Mets: $96,660,970 - 48%
Phillies: $93,219,167 - 49%
Dodgers: $92,902,001 - 50%
Average advantage: 45%
2003
Yankees: $152,749,814
Mets: $117,176,429 - 23%
Braves: $106,243,667 - 30%
Dodgers: $105,872,620 - 31%
Rangers: $103,491,667 - 32%
Red Sox: $99,946,500 - 35%
Average advantage: 30%
2002
Yankees: $125,928,583
Red Sox: $108,366,060 - 14%
Rangers: $105,726,122 - 16%
DBacks: $102,819,999 - 18%
Dodgers: $94,850,953 - 25%
Mets: $94,633,593 - 25%
Average advantage: 20%
2001
Yankees: $112,287,143
Red Sox: $109,675,833 - 2%
Dodgers: $109,105,953 - 3%
Mets: $93,674,428 - 17%
Indians: $92,660,001 - 17%
Braves: $91,936,166 - 18%
Average advantage: 11%
2000
Yankees: $92,938,260
Dodgers: $90,375,953 - 3%
Orioles: $83,141,198 - 11%
Braves: $82,732,500 - 11%
Red Sox: $81,210,333 - 12%
Mets: $79,759,762 - 14%
Average advantage: 10%
|
| 48 | Species
ID: 711122010
Mon, Dec 20, 2010, 11:12
|
I love the Grienke trade for the Brewers....with him and Marcum they can compete in the NL Central. IMO the Royals only did ok....I really would've expected them to get at least one all-star projectable prospect out of it, and I don't see it at all. Escobar and Cain are ok...the pitchers are okay.....just no studs. Not a bad trade necessarily....but not the haul I would have expected.
MITH -- dude, who has pissed in your Corn Flakes lately? Can you take the ultra aggressive/defensive argument style back to the Poli Board please (Lee thread in particular)?
|
| 49 | Mith
ID: 4010542612
Mon, Dec 20, 2010, 11:40
|
Sorry Species if I've offended you, I just dont take blatant falsehoods, being told to "give it a rest" by someone without a clue or having the point of my posts twisted up beyond recognition very well. I guess I'm odd that way.
|
| 50 | Mith
ID: 4010542612
Mon, Dec 20, 2010, 11:44
|
And ftr I have no idea why my posts here would have prompted that remark, Species, even as you note that you take greater issue in the other thread. I think the data I put together in 45/47 is really interesting stuff you won't find compiled anyplace else.
|
| 51 | Species
ID: 711122010
Mon, Dec 20, 2010, 12:05
|
Because MITH....IMO this board should be baseball talk in a more simple form. I don't like the Yankees getting $hit on any more than you do, but I personally don't enjoy Sean Hannity references and Poli-board style arguments where any sentance can be dissected and attacked with four links to prove a counter-point.
Yeah I said it here...because I'd like this thread to continue to have real chatter and not turn into the mess that is the Lee thread. Of course, I'm not the board police....just one dude in this community with an opinion.
To answer your question, IMO your defensive tone and point-belaboring in here is reeking of the tone in the Lee thread, so I commented. R9 has more than a clue...not that he needs me to defend him but he's pretty baseball savvy for a french-speaker ;)
|
| 52 | Mith
ID: 4010542612
Mon, Dec 20, 2010, 12:13
|
I guess I should just learn to stfu when someone savvy comes along (Anyone else in range? Anyone else even over 100 mi?) and tells me to give it a rest.
Hear Hear!
Yeah thanks for the advice.
|
| 53 | R9
ID: 2854239
Mon, Dec 20, 2010, 12:36
|
MITH, my beef isn't with the Yankees its with baseball's economy, and how the haves consistantly get hugely lucrative bonuses over the have-nots. I've said this before.
Every other major sport has attempted to curb the advantage money plays in the competing of the sport except baseball, which has watched it reach ridiculous levels while doing nothing. (Revenue-sharing is a joke and everyone knows it.) If anything, the Sox catching the Yankees is just another example. Its not baseball getting closer to money parity, its another 'have' growing their advantage over the have-nots, who clearly have not gained on anyone in the last decade.
Is that a shot at the Yankees? Not really. Its a shot at baseball, one I've taken before, and to be honest I can still be a fan without focusing on it. A part of me even likes the all-star dynasty-like teams the haves can throw together. (Must be my Habs background.) But yeah, I guess I don't like having every discussion devolve into one about the Yankees and money, certainly not in a thread titled MLB Hot stove, and certainly not when there is a Yankees thread already on this board. Thats why I said give it a rest.
I guess I should just learn to stfu when someone savvy comes along (Anyone else in range? Anyone else even over 100 mi?) and tells me to give it a rest.
Probably not a bad idea, and I don't mean that in a bad way. If you really think someone is an idiot, and defending your point is going to take 5 tldr; posts and take a discussion way OT, maybe letting the idiot stay an idiot is a better path to take?
|
| 54 | R9
ID: 2854239
Mon, Dec 20, 2010, 12:43
|
48, while there isn't a top prospect in the group, KC got alot of young depth where they needed it. They had no CF prospect, no SS prospect, and their RP prospects were actually fairly weak as well. Both the SS and CF prospects are excellent defenders, and Cain probably has leadoff potential, something else their prospect pool was light on.
So addressing defense up the middle in spots where they had none was a solid move imo. I also suspect the offers out there adding in top prospects was alot lighter then we'd imagine. While Greinke certainly commands a top prospect, there were few available from teams who needed the SP. So not a bad time to take some quantity over quality.
KC is going to be a fun team to follow for a few years.
|
| 55 | R9
ID: 2854239
Mon, Dec 20, 2010, 12:48
|
Funny thing is, anyone who honestly cares about league parity the good of the game more than they care about their victim complex and having a good reason to hate the Yankees should see this as very good news rather than a reason to attack the messenger.
Just saw this. I agree that parity is starting to be reached at the top levels. But parity for all of MLB is getting farther away, not closer. Two 'have' teams are reaching higher levels, while no 'have-not' team has gained in money. Agree?
My favorite sport's league, the NHL, has a salary cap that the vast majority of teams has reached. Its also got a cap on draftee contracts, so players are actually drafted based on perceived talent, and not on signability concerns. Other then 3-4 franchises that are still struggling financially, the league has monetary parity, and the 'have' franchises are those with the best talent, both on the ice and in the offices. Which is fun to see. When a team like Philly goes to the cup final, we know they got there through good management and solid play, not because they were able to sign 5 have-not team's best players.
|
| 56 | KrazyKoalaBears
ID: 517068
Mon, Dec 20, 2010, 13:00
|
MITH, please feel free to continue.
As a Nats fan, I look forward to the day when I can have payback for all the snarky remarks about the team I root for.
The Yankees are clearly not the far-and-away biggest spenders in MLB like they used to be, so your point in #39 is completely valid and raises interesting points about the spending of other teams in this MLB Hot Stove season.
|
| 57 | Mith
ID: 4010542612
Mon, Dec 20, 2010, 13:12
|
R9
You might be right on most of the topics you touched on -- but not, I don't think, what you said about 'parity for all of MLB'. I suspect it has likely improved at least moderately, with the possible exception of one or more teams that haven't seemed interested in helping themselves. This is a good topic for a new thread. Probably be a couple of days before I have time to dive into it.
|
| 58 | Species
ID: 711122010
Mon, Dec 20, 2010, 13:44
|
Re: 54 -- good points. To a team like the Royals, a premium on cheap, salary-controlled ML-ready players makes sense. That they got two at positions of organizational scarcity again has value to them. I just don't think either of these guys are very good. Escobar looked over his head at the plate last year...and his 25+ sb speed didn't even materialize, as he went 10 for 14 in sb.
Time will always tell.....but history suggests that the team receiving the star usually wins. I think KC could have waited....although I DO get the points out there that suggest it might have gotten ugly if they started the season with Grienke.
|
| 59 | Great One
ID: 1711331610
Mon, Dec 20, 2010, 13:49
|
We need a floor and a salary cap, keep everybody in the 50 MM to 125 MM range.
|
| 60 | R9
ID: 2854239
Mon, Dec 20, 2010, 13:53
|
58, I tend to agree. The majority of the time, the team that gets the best player wins the deal. And I'm not all that big on the players they got either, though if both Escobar and Cain reach the top of their potential its a good deal. Its just tough for two non-blue chip prospects to both pan out.
59, that seems solid. I think every market can afford to spend 100-125 mil during a couple of contender seasons, saving some money by spending 50-60 mil during rebuilding years. And if they cant, they really ought to be contracted/moved. Just like in hockey, the 3-4 teams that are still having financial problems really ought to be moved.
|
| 61 | Tosh
Leader
ID: 057721710
Mon, Dec 20, 2010, 15:30
|
Examining Why Kansas City Dealt Zach Greinke
|
| 62 | Electroman
Donor
ID: 010833614
Mon, Dec 20, 2010, 18:33
|
I heard a snippet of a Billy Butler interview where he was happy that Greinke got traded because something about solving a problem. I guess he wasn't happy.
RE 55
Donald Fehr is now defending the players in the NHLPA, I think it has been made official. Interesting to see how that will work out. There is no parity in baseball.
Someone mentioned something about a salary floor. The problem with that is that teams often overpay players that are not worth the salary to hit that floor, so it doesn't really serve the purpose it is supposed to.
|
| 63 | MBT
ID: 191142515
Tue, Dec 21, 2010, 15:13
|
From MLB.com
“There’s no surprise,” Butler said Monday. “This has been a controversy ever since Zack had that article that came out and he was wanting out. Whenever you do something like that, the organization has no choice but to trade you. I’m just happy that its behind us now, because if it would have kept lingering on any longer, I think it would have affected the team.”
“You don’t want somebody to be somewhere they don’t want to. That being said, Zack made it public that he didn’t want to be here anymore. As the Kansas City Royals, you don’t want that around. It’s not good for your team. I hope it works out for Zack in Milwaukee. I think we got some great pieces that came over.”
|
| 64 | MBT
ID: 191142515
Tue, Dec 21, 2010, 15:16
|
Harden back with the A's according to MLB.com
"Rumblings of a reunion began last week, but the A's made their second partnership with hurler Rich Harden official on Tuesday by announcing a one-year deal with the right-hander.
Harden's contract is worth $1.5 million plus incentives."
|
| 65 | Perm Dude
ID: 5510572522
Mon, Dec 27, 2010, 15:44
|
Dotel close to signing with the Blue Jays
|
| 66 | Electroman
ID: 3170417
Fri, Jan 07, 2011, 13:21
|
Garza to Cubs pending physicals.
|
| 67 | Mith
ID: 371138719
Sat, Jan 08, 2011, 00:01
|
Given a choice, I so would have preferred the Yankees trade for Garza than sign Lee. I knew the chance was remote if it existed at all that Tampa would trade him to a team within the division. And the package sent by the Cubs was probably more than I'd have cared to see the Yankees match.
But Garza is 27, still arbitration-eligible, has been a starter in the AL East for 3 full seasons and never posted an ERA of 4 or higher and is a solid 7-4, 3.83 in 18 career starts against the Red Sox.
I think he's gonna be great in Chicago.
|
| 68 | blue hen
Dude
ID: 710321114
Mon, Jan 10, 2011, 12:56
|
I think Garza will be good, but I think the Yankees will find a way to make a splash with a pitcher.
|
| 69 | Perm Dude
ID: 5510572522
Mon, Jan 10, 2011, 13:02
|
Maybe. But without trading their top pick, any top prospects, and with few top SP remaining as FA's, it is hard to see how that would happen.
I suspect they'll take a shot on someone like Webb or Chris Young at the back of the order and count themselves lucky if they get 10-12 wins out of it.
|
| 70 | Mith
ID: 4010542612
Mon, Jan 10, 2011, 16:42
|
The addition of Martin would indicate an increased willingness to move Montero. It could possibly mean they're disappointed in Montero's glove or impressed with the progress of Romine's bat or possibly trying to give the illusion of the latter to increase Romine's trade value.
That might sound silly but it feels like Romine's been getting a bit of extra attention lately. A few weeks back, the NY Daily News (a sports page which George Steinbrenner seemed to always enjoya certain preferred status) ran a big full-page article that just gushed over Romine. Seemed a bit odd with Montero so well established as the top talent in the organization - and at the same position.
I agree they'll be willing to move some prospects for a SP but Cashman seems pretty determined to not overpay and he doesn't seem to be bluffing when he says he's willing to open the season with the talent he has.
|
| 71 | Electroman
ID: 3170417
Fri, Jan 21, 2011, 19:59
|
Wells to the Angels.
Juan Rivera and Mike Napoli would go to the Jays in return.
|
| 72 | Species
Dude
ID: 07724916
Fri, Jan 21, 2011, 21:56
|
Why in the F**K would the Angels take on that albatross of a contract????? Exclusive of the money, good trade. Just. Wow.
|
| 73 | Electroman
ID: 3170417
Sat, Jan 22, 2011, 13:54
|
I think he is able to opt out after 2011, doubt that will happen. He won't get 20 million per year again.
|
| 74 | filthy
Sustainer
ID: 568191312
Sat, Jan 22, 2011, 19:12
|
If VW can win over the Angels next season, it might be beneficial for both sides to opt out of the last 3 years/60ish million, and restructure into a 5/75 type deal. Might be tough for him to even earn a contract by 2014, so anything above what is currently guaranteed would likely be a bonus for him.
Or maybe he will go into contract mode, and have a killer season that sets him up with a huge contract to end his career in Texas.
Wouldn't be crazy to see him opt out, and it's slowly becoming a really bad contract, rather than an epic fail contract. Mostly due to other teams lowering the standards, but I'm sure the Angels are fine with that.
Absolutely nothing holding the Jays back now. They just cut their long term contract investments by like 60%. Wells was the Jays best cleanup hitter by default, and that will be missed, but I think Napoli might be able to fill that spot. All of those relief signings were just the appetizers, this trade was worth not seeing any big free agent moves. Go Jays.
|
| 75 | Graydog
ID: 260361718
Sat, Jan 22, 2011, 20:00
|
I think from a jays standpoint this is obviously a great move long term. im shocked the Angels took on this contract. I think they will get something in return for Rivera eventually. Unless Lind rebounds this deal hurts Bautista's fantasy value as who else on the jays has the kind of bat that can be protection for Bautista?
|
| 76 | Skidazl
ID: 3253219
Sat, Jan 22, 2011, 22:19
|
As an Angels fan, I like the move, never been much of a Napoli fan, he either K's or hit a HR, and he is pathetic behind the plate. This will give them the chance to bring up Conger, whose potential I like a lot.
Rivera was also a liability defensively and if he isn't playing everyday, as he wouldn't for the Angels with Abreu, Bourgos and Hunter, then his offensive numbers seem to drop a lot.
If Wells can return to form, or as mentioned before, go into contract mode, I'm liking our chances today a lot better than 2 days ago.
|
| 77 | Great One
ID: 56051423
Sun, Jan 23, 2011, 00:56
|
Manny and Damon to the Rays? interesting.
|
| 78 | Mith
ID: 4010542612
Sun, Jan 23, 2011, 07:42
|
Surprised that Manny was only able to command $2m.
|
| 79 | Khahan
ID: 13126822
Sun, Jan 23, 2011, 13:39
|
Considering the reputation Manny has and his actual production the last 2 years, I'm not.
|
| 80 | Matt G
ID: 250262319
Sun, Jan 23, 2011, 20:26
|
Twins Off season.
Coming off a great regular season and another disappointing first round exit, things looked grim for the Twins. The Twins we set to lose arguably their best starting pitcher, team MVP of the second half, the majority of their bullpen which has been their strength as well as the middle of their infield.
What they had to gain was getting Justin Morneau back, Joe Mauer getting healthy, Michael Cuddyer figuring it out while playing his actual position and Danny Valencia maturing even more to fill the void which has been third base.
What they need: a Front line starter, bullpen help and a right handed bat. As well as a 1B/3B backup to help if morneau/valencia go down. And a C backup.
What they got: Same team as last year, minus the stud bullpen and more question marks in the middle in field.
What the Twins did was sit back and bring the pieces they had form last year. Casilla was great in 2008, but has regressed since then. Nishioka has drawn comparisons to Ichiro and might bet a great bat to hit in front of Mauer. Carl Pavano is back from one of his best, if not his best seasons ever, but has yet to put together back to back years. Nathan and Capps provide two great arms in the bullpen, but Nathan might not be ready, Neshek should be back to take the place of Guerrier as a situational righty. Thome comes back as the veteran clubhouse guy, he gave the twins a discount because he loved playing there so much, has to say something about this organization.
What I wish they did: Use the plethora of starting pitchers and some of the outfield prospects to get Greinke. Greinke would have loved the Minnesota clubhouse, I think you'd see some of his best work yet if he'd been traded to minnesota. I wish they got a Right handed bat. Jim Thome is great, and he was key down the stretch for the twins, BUT he is a lefty as are most of the twins big bats Morneau, Mauer, Thome, Kubel... all lefties. On the right all they have are Young and Cuddyer, and while Young had a career year, Cuddyer looked lost at times. I wish they would have chased one of the high risk high reward injury guys to add to the rotation. Why not sign Manny instead of Thome, put him at the DH position and left him rake from the #5 hole. Also needed a better backup then Drew Butera for Mauer
Outlook: People keep saying the tigers and the sox did so much to catch if not pass the twins, and they might be right, but we've been hearing for years about this and the twins have been content to promote from within and bring in pieces. Is Nishioka going to be better than Hardy at the plate and at the bat? It's possible. Is casilla going to be comparable to the O-Dog at 2B? Maybe... Can Mauer and Morneau stay healthy for the entire year? Will Pavano and Liriano post similar numbers to 2010 or 2009? Can the bullpen be a strength again even while losing most of the big arms?
I think the twins will stay on pace and continue to win, With Morneau and Mauer healthy, they can carry the offense, Nishioka should fit nicely at #2 and Valencia hopefully won't regress too much as a sophomore. Despite losing a bunch of bullpen pieces, Nathan and Capps should help, and if both of them are healthy the other can be a trade piece mid season. Anthony Slama and Glen Perkins will be fine as middle relief, Mijares and Diamond will be the lefty guys and Neshek is 2 years removed from Tommy John and Should be filthy against righties. Alex Burnett will be in the mix as well and the twins now have 7 starters, plus Kyle Gibson knocking on the door to the rotation.
Some one you haven't heard of is Estarlin de los Santos. A few years ago was one of the top dominican republic prospects, he's 24 and might see some time later in the year.
|
| 81 | Seattle Zen
Leader
ID: 055343019
Sun, Jan 23, 2011, 21:02
|
I like the thought behind making an offer for Grienke. I, too, think he would have fit in well.
You couldn't be serious about signing Manny, though, that would invalidate many of the points in your story. Thome gave the Twins a discount because their clubhouse and organization is the type of place where Manny does not fit in. It would not have worked.
|
| 82 | Matt G
ID: 250262319
Mon, Jan 24, 2011, 09:27
|
Seattle - You're correct, perhaps I should rephrase that... A bat LIKE Manny. The needed a RH bat to come off the bench and to DH against Lefties... Thome and Kubel were terrible against lefties last year, and having a strong Righty that you can counter with when bullpens go lefty to get past Mauer and Morneau... Cuddyer doesn't scare anyone and Delmon has to have another repeat season before they start being afraid of him too.
I don't think Manny would have been too toxic in the clubhouse, he seemed lovable on the idiots in Boston, possibly the light heartedness in Minny would have helped? Who knows, I still stand by needed a RH power bat off the bench... Althought, being that the bullpen is the twins only major concern right now, I think they will be ok. Two allstar closers at the end. A former starter in the LR role. We have to remember that Guerrier was a waiver pickup, Eddie Guardado was a failed Starter, LaTroy Hawkins was one of the worst relievers in the league before Rick Anderson got to him and Joe Nathan was a struggling SS and an also ran in the Pierzynski trade that brought Liriano and Boof Bonser(of which Boof was the centerpiece)
Middle relievers are one of the most plentiful commodities in MLB, if that is my favorite teams biggest concern then I'm not too worried.
|
| 83 | Electroman
Donor
ID: 010833614
Tue, Jan 25, 2011, 21:06
|
Napoli gets traded back to the AL West, Texas, for releiver Francisco.
|
| 84 | Species
ID: 711122010
Wed, Jan 26, 2011, 12:03
|
Re: Matt G #82
Dude, what version of Joe Nathan's story did you read? By the time MIN got Nathan, he'd LONG since been converted to pitcher, had 2 mediocre seasons as a starter....blew out his elbow or shoulder and missed nearly two seasons. Installed as a reliever in 2003, he went 12-4 with peripherals approaching those he achieved with the Twins. To characterize the Twins as revolutionizing him into the pitcher he is on their own is hyperbolous at best.
The Giants, IIRC, I think felt like they were playing with house money, getting value for a converted SS with 1 yr of relief success. Too bad they didn't know what they had.
|
| 85 | mc5huffl35
Leader
ID: 00795541
Sun, Jan 30, 2011, 00:42
|
Brian Wilson... awesome
|
| 86 | Matt G
ID: 19126211
Wed, Feb 02, 2011, 12:26
|
Species - you are correct, he was a couple years from that, I guess I shouldn't have pointed that out, but more pointed out that they got Liriano, and Nathan who was a throw-in at that point but there were rumors of him being a closer right off the bat... Either way the twins saw success in that..
My point is, the twins have found relievers all over the place, whether Nathan as a throw in on a trade or guerrier, etc.
|
| Rate this thread: | If you wish, you may rate this thread on scale of 1-5. Ratings should indicate how valuable or interesting you believe this thread would be to other users of this forum. A '5' means that this thread is a 'must read'. A '1' means that this is a complete waste of time. If you have previously rated this thread, rating it again will delete your previous rating. If you do not want to rate this thread, but want to see how others have rated it, then click the button without entering a rating, or else click here. |
|
|
|
Post a reply to this message:
|
|