Moose Milligan

I agree, I said that the Rangers made a bad signing but they think they're doing something good. That's their prerogative. And that is what the MFYs do, they can afford to do it. Rangers, I'm assuming, not so much. I don't even know what we're arguing about anymore.

Go look it up if you're so worried about it. Onus is on you to look it up if you care so much. But you'd be the only one on here who's so concerned with what people were saying on here 6 months ago.

I think plenty of us have suggested FAs that we'd like to sign and prefer not to sign. For me it's been Ed-Rod and Matz.

I think I've been pretty clear in regards to what just happened with the Semien signing. It seems like you're the only one here who's having a hard time grasping what I've stated. CoC seems to get it. SG seems to get it. OsFanSincethe80s seems to get it. I've got no idea what I said or didn't say about Ed-Rod this past summer.

It's funny that you think you're dealing in reality...and then make a claim on here that no one is making.

What? The Semien signing is proof that you don't have to be in some sort of a "window" to go out and make a signing in free agency. Do I think the Rangers just made a bad signing? Absolutely, I do. But the idea here is that if the Rangers, who won 60 games last year, went out and signed Semien for 7/175, we absolutely could have and SHOULD HAVE signed Ed-Rod to whatever deal he got from the Tigers...another terrible team who's attempting to make themselves better. All of these teams who are practically just as bad as us are trying to make themselves better. Some of the signings they've made are good, some of them are bad. But at least they're trying. I don't believe that Ed-Rod was ever on our radar and it's stupid that he wasn't. Yes, I'll complain about that. Looking forward to your weird-ass interpretation of my post.

No, I know. They're dumb signings. You'd have thought they'd have learned back when they signed A-Rod to his first deal but clearly they didn't.

Depends on the numbers, I'm not sure if Bryant would be good for us or not. Some seem to think he can still play at a relatively high level, others aren't so sure. It would be a risk for us but it would certainly depend on the length of the contract.

"Yeah, but the Rangers play in a weaker division so this makes more sense for them."

Well I do judge you by your taste in music.

Really, did I advocate us signing Semien? I believe I said in the very next post it was a bad signing. I think I've been pretty clear that Ed-Rod and Matz could have been good signings for us. Would you have wanted one of them or both of them or rolled into 2022 with Kremer, Akin, and Lowther? You get one of Ed-Rod or Matz and you're looking at a rotation of Means, G-Rod, Ed-Rod/Matz and then whatever 4th and 5th you want to fill in with Kremer/Akin/Lowther. That's a good top 3.

Especially when you've picked really high over the past few years and have the #1 pick coming up. Enough is enough, try to make this team better now. I'm not saying they've gotta spend Semien money (that's a bad contract) but I think they could have spend some decent money this offseason and possibly get to 68-72 wins next year. But the guys that I wanted us to target are gone, IIRC. I don't think there's anyone else left out there that I felt made sense. I just wanted us to really target 2-3 starting pitchers.

Hey @wildcard the Rangers suck ass and only had 8 more wins than us but they just dished out 7/175 to Marcus Semien. Don't tell me we couldn't have signed Ed-Rod or Matz, bro.

Wow. Didn't see that coming.

Inclined to agree with this. Or maybe they're making this deal with the idea that they're going to relocate to a better market where they can drive more revenue. But yes, flexibility. The only way it hamstrings flexibility is if Franco ****s the bed in a Chris Davis manner.

It’s possible they’re looking at him this way. If he’s putting up enough WAR to justify that salary, they’ll find a suitor who will take most of that on and they can re-stock their system with some good talent.

Getting back to Frobby's original comp, based on what Urias has done so far, I'd be slightly disappointed if he put up Eduardo Escobar numbers.

You want names? Fine. Ed-Rod and Matz. Two very realistic guys we could have between the average yearly salary ranges of 11 and 15 million a year. DeSclafani just signed for 3/36, 12 million a year. Kluber just went to Tampa for a 1 year, 8 million deal, you mean to tell me we couldn't have given him a 2/16 million deal? We couldn't have given DeSclafani an extra 1.5 per year? We could have had any of those guys for the deals they signed for and we weren't even rumored to be remotely close to any of them. Those are all guys that could have made us better and those are all contracts that we could easily have afforded...even if you wanted to pay a little more because of the whole "well, we've gotta pay extra to get guys to Baltimore" trope, we could have done it. There, wildcard. Those are all deals we could have easily done, all deals that practically any team could have signed those guys for.

Look up the definition of hypothetical when you get a chance. Thanks.

Urias is a good player and I'd like to see him be the full time 2nd baseman in 2022. He can hit a little, there's good separation between the batting average and on base percentage...not a lot of power, but that's fine. If he can hover at that .365 OBP range, that's a good #2 hitter. The glove at 2nd seems solid...maybe not spectacular, but that's okay. There's a good bit of value here. SS/3B remains to be seen, they can keep shuffling the deck chairs over there as far as I'm concerned but 2nd base should be held down by Urias. He's earned it.

That's fine. And it confirms what we've speculated here...which is, that of course he's gotta listen to see what's out there. IMO, there's only a few guys that are borderline untouchable in the game today. I think it's a low chance that Means and Mullins are moved this offseason but you never know. Elias is doing his due diligence by seeing what's out there and there's nothing wrong with that.

I've got no choice but to indict the son for the father's sins. It's not inconceivable that the father and the son both have similar thoughts on how to operate an ML franchise. While John seems to have differed on things such as signing in the south American markets and being forward thinking in general, the father and son don't seem to like to spend money on the ML product. Elias has been clear, yes, he's focused on adding talent to help get the team to the playoffs but to pretend that you can only do that through your drafting/international signing/developing efforts is silly. Look, it's very obvious to me...if you're a 50 win team, a 60 win team, a 70 win team...even an 80 or 90 win team, you should always be looking for ways to to get better no matter how you do it. Even if it's small increments, you do it. If you're a 50 win team and there's a free agent out there in the 4/50 range that will plug a hole for you, get the player. Why wouldn't you? In other words, if you're not constantly trying to get better, what the **** are you waiting for? Billy Beane had a great line, I can't find it...essentially he said if you're not in playoff contention, you're reloading and retooling and figuring out how to get there. Anything in the middle is a waste of time.

You call it negative, I call it realistic. And realistic because this franchise has not given us a lot of reasons to be optimistic over the years. Despite the disaster that has consisted of the ML roster for the past 3+ seasons, there's hopefully some help on the horizon. As you've noted, Elias has done a solid job in getting the franchise into the 21st century with international efforts, analytics, development, etc...but I also find it sad that we have to applaud the Angelos family for taking forever to bring someone onboard to get this franchise back to the pack of what other ML teams are doing. It's not like this franchise is innovative. You do bring up some decent points about John Angelos, but he still hasn't spent any money on the ML roster in the past 3+ years. I'm not saying we have to be bringing in guys who are going to command 150 million, 200 million, 300 million contracts but it's absurd that the roster hasn't been bolstered by mid-tier free agents in recent years. If it turns out that it's Elias's decision to not spend, that's on him, then. Maybe it's both of their decisions, who knows. But if you don't want to be challenged on what you have to say, then why post at all? It's no fun if you want to live in an echo-chamber and read people who

It's always sunny at wildcards place!

Would you argue with either one?