Jump to content

Reboulet'sStache

Limited Posting Member
  • Posts

    3027
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Reboulet'sStache

  • Birthday 03/31/1984

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Reboulet'sStache's Achievements

Veteran All-Star

Veteran All-Star (12/14)

  • First Post
  • Collaborator
  • Posting Machine Rare
  • Conversation Starter
  • Week One Done

Recent Badges

80

Reputation

  1. I think the Braves taking on O'Day's salary wasn't costless to us. It's reflected in the return. You think they took on O'Day for free because they are just sweet on Dan or something.
  2. Walk me through the logic of this? You're saying the return we got for Gausman is what we would have gotten. Then we asked the Braves if they would also take O'Day, and the Braves said, "Yeah, we're feeling generous. Throw him in too." The Orioles would have to give consideration for the Braves taking O'Day. There's no other way to look at it.
  3. That's not really a "belief." The Braves took on O'Day's salary as a salary dump. They didn't do that out of the kindness of their hearts. All anybody could possibly argue is the extent to which it diminished the return. But nobody could, in good faith, argue it didn't diminish the return.
  4. I can't. I've already explained all of that in numerous other posts. At this point it would just be me copying and pasting.
  5. It's not really overrating Gausman per se. Whatever Gausman's return should have been. What Gausman gets you as a stand alone. "This amount in international slot money and these prospects." By including O'Day in the deal, just so you can free up money for the glorious run next year, that package was diminished to whatever degree. Which makes it a dumb move.
  6. I'm talking about not sacrificing prospect returns. And what is actually the smarter payroll strategy during a real build.
  7. I have absolutely no point what you're making here? 1. Most teams that would need to get Davis' contract off the books, aren't dumb enough to sign him to that contract, so it's not on the books. Most teams capable of signing Davis, aren't sending his contract to you with prospects, because they don't need you to take on his contract. Think the Phillies with Howard. They never would have dumped his salary on anybody for prospects, because they could afford to keep it on the books if that meant they got to keep their prospects. 2. What does any of this have to do with the Orioles dumping O'Day's salary at the expense of prospects? Can you point to me teams that go into prospect rebuild mode and dump salary at the expense of prospects?
  8. And taking less of a prospect return so you can clear O'Day's salary, is not how you obtain those great prospects.
  9. I already explained this to you. It would increase the prospect return. Which is all that matters during a rebuild. You don't do ANYTHING that comes at the expense of prospects. Rebuilds SUCKKKKKKKKKK. There's no such thing as an enjoyable one. All you can do is hope they don't last long. You know how they don't last long? You get as many good prospects as you can, as quickly as you can, to get you a competitive, cost controlled team. You know how you do that? You don't do anything that comes at the expense of prospects. Instead, you do everything that allows for the maximizing of prospects.
  10. Yes, I'll take every team's Chris Davis and Trumbo right now if their contracts align with our rebuild. Now if they are on the books for the next 10 years, obviously I don't want that. But 0 WAR players that are making too much money and teams want to get rid of? Let me have them. Send me your top prospects and I'll take them. Build up an elite farm system. And about the time where all of these prospects I've "bought" are ready to turn us into a competitor, is the time these salaries are coming off the books. And now I take that money and invest it in legit free agents to supplement the young, cost controlled players I brought. That's called a rebuild.
  11. And the best way to use it for the future would be to keep it on the books for a greater prospect return. Since that of course is the lifeblood of your future.
  12. The Braves basically paid us to keep prospects. When we are the team rebuilding and in need of prospects. This actually makes me envy the Cleveland Browns. They took Osweiller's salary on for a year because they had no intention of investing the money to compete right away. So they invested it in something that allowed them to get back a 2nd Round pick. They brought prospects for their rebuild. We're in a rebuild and shedding prospects. You can't explain it.
×
×
  • Create New...