Jump to content

This could be a big week for the O's acquisitions


wildcard

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 84
  • Created
  • Last Reply
I think LaRoche signs with the Gnats. They are the only team not losing a pick. All that needs to happen is a compromise on an option for a third year. I think the O's will be in on Morse if that happens.

I think that happens as well and if we can sign Saunders to two years only, then I think that's what I would prefer at this stage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LaRoche wants three years and nobody seems to want to give it to him. I cannot see him not signing with Nats and I do not see us giving up a pick for him. Seems like Nats are holding out to see if we give in.

Texas is certainly a posibility, they may overpay. As for the O's signing him, I believe it's more the money and the years than the pick. Also I believe LaRoche wants to be in DC. imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if the Nats would move Moore at all. I know he is younger and would cost more in a trade, but I would rather have him. Though I have heard nothing of the likes of the Nats wanting to move him. But with Harper, Span, and Werth along with either Laroche or Morse, there may not be room for him.

Nope. Rizzo likes Moore quite a bit.

He's one of the reasons the Nats are only offering LaRoche a 2-year deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

More bottom of the barrel upgrades. Smoak isnt a upgrade over the player you let go to upgrade.

If he starts the year at Norfolk, and the coaches there can fix him like they did with McLouth, he could be a major upgrade for the next 3 or 4 years.

That said, I wouldn't trade a ton for him. Maybe Arrieta and a C prospect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Texas is certainly a posibility, they may overpay. As for the O's signing him, I believe it's more the money and the years than the pick. Also I believe LaRoche wants to be in DC. imo.

JMO, certainly the years and money are very important. But I (now) think DD is holding onto that pick with both fists. Swisher was better, comparable money, comparable players, but Swisher is much more consistent and likely to at least approach the true cost of the contract. And except way back at the Winter Meetings Dan showed absolutely no interest in Swisher.

And just a friendly shot across the bow of wildcard... :P THIS week is NOT going to be a big week. Not Xmas/NY week. The next 2 or 3 weeks on the other hand... could be huge. Just a picky point really. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If he starts the year at Norfolk, and the coaches there can fix him like they did with McLouth, he could be a major upgrade for the next 3 or 4 years.

Not that I disagree with this at all, but we already have this in Conor Jackson. It comes down to available ABs at 1B at Norfolk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This whole LaRoche thing to the Nats really mystifies me. They shouldn't sign him. Period. They have both Morse and Rendon pounding on the door at 3B for depth who they will have to work around if they sign the oft injured, often under performing slugger. Yeah, I get he had a great year for you in your "magical" season, but he isn't a fit for your organization going forward. I understand the fans having an attatchment and wanting him back, but I'm really confused why the front office is actually seriously considering him for their future plans. It would be the worst "contract extension" since they locked up Dimitri Young.

How is he oft injured? Over 7 of the last 8 years, he has averaged 148 games played. He had ONE year where he was injured!

He has also been over 100 OPS+ every year but one, in 2011 when he was hurt.

He has an .820 lifetime OPS and averages 27 HRs and 93 RBIs per 162 games. Coming off a gold glove. What is not to like? He is not a one year wonder. Better choice than Morse, IMO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...