Tell me again why we didn't claim Verlander

[Tx Oriole]

8 hours ago, bird watcher said:

I gladly accept him and his contract with not cash coming back if I don't have to give anything up. I guess the O's weren't, which I find objectionable. 

You would but Angelos sure wouldn't. IMO 

[bird watcher]

51 minutes ago, Tx Oriole said:

You would but Angelos sure wouldn't. IMO 

Truth. And that is the real reason we didn't claim him. ?

[MDtransplant757]

Because it didn’t fit into angelos’ budget this year or the next few years

[interloper]

We didn't put in a claim because Angelos would not have signed off on the risk of paying $28 million for a 34 year old pitcher. The end.

[eddie83]

8 minutes ago, interloper said:

We didn't put in a claim because Angelos would not have signed off on the risk of paying $28 million for a 34 year old pitcher. The end.

And yet some people will rip DD this offseason for being cheap and a dumpster diver. 

[weams]

21 hours ago, bird watcher said:

Good point. I still have to wonder if they feel like it would have been worth it for a World series appearance. 

They say not. They say the reset is the most important thing now. 

[weams]

 

Quote

 

  On 10/15/2017 at 11:34 AM, bird watcher said:

I gladly accept him and his contract with not cash coming back if I don't have to give anything up. I guess the O's weren't, which I find objectionable. 

 

I assume the Tigers wanted something and would have pulled him back if he were claimed. 

 

 

[spiritof66]

5 hours ago, eddie83 said:

And yet some people will rip DD this offseason for being cheap and a dumpster diver. 

I agree that many of these criticisms are unfair, but you have to figure that Dan knew when he took the job that he would be answerable to an owner who would be very likely to meddle in these personnel and contract matters, is a clueless fool as far as putting together a baseball team is concerned, and was already in his 80s. Duquette may have underestimated the extent to which the owner wouldn't acknowledge his own role in these decisions, (or non-decisions) or the role of Brady in some decisions, but he had to know in general terms what he was getting into . 

. 

[Ruzious]

A lot of plans that could have happened didn't and won't because of the Davis contract.  Indirectly, that was one of many reasons there was no way the O's were going to go after Verlander.  

[Phantom]

22 hours ago, spiritof66 said:

I agree that many of these criticisms are unfair, but you have to figure that Dan knew when he took the job that he would be answerable to an owner who would be very likely to meddle in these personnel and contract matters, is a clueless fool as far as putting together a baseball team is concerned, and was already in his 80s. Duquette may have underestimated the extent to which the owner wouldn't acknowledge his own role in these decisions, (or non-decisions) or the role of Brady in some decisions, but he had to know in general terms what he was getting into . 
 

Sure. And then he tried to parlay some moderate success into a real job with a better ownership structure.

[spiritof66]

1 hour ago, Phantom said:

Sure. And then he tried to parlay some moderate success into a real job with a better ownership structure.

It's the American Way. Sometimes it works only if you're willing to leave the country, I guess. 

[sportsfan8703]

Real simple reason why we couldn't claim Verlander. We already had 50ish million tied up in useless pitching. Tillman, Ubaldo, Miley. Plus if we weren't locked into Davis and Trumbo. We already had too much dead weight, too much in bad contracts going forward, and players getting big raises in arb. 

[weams]

16 hours ago, Phantom said:

Sure. And then he tried to parlay some moderate success into a real job with a better ownership structure.

And their ownership was better why?

[Phantom]

6 hours ago, weams said:

And their ownership was better why?

I don't know too much about the Blue Jays ownership, but from afar it seems like they are less meddling than Angelos.

[weams]

2 hours ago, Phantom said:

I don't know too much about the Blue Jays ownership, but from afar it seems like they are less meddling than Angelos.

My understanding is that they are slightly better than the former Marlins ownership.