Page 94 of 146 FirstFirst ... 44849293949596104144 ... LastLast
Results 1,861 to 1,880 of 2907

Thread: Around The Majors 2019

  1. #1861
    Arbitration Eligible
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    3,381
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    68
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,171
    Thanked in
    773 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by clvclv View Post
    That's a bit of a problem since the reports say they plan to use Montgomery in the rotation.

    I don't think Montgomery's much other than a placeholder either, but it's not like anybody was going to give them a prospect with any realistic chance of turning into anything for Maldonado - can only guess that they're hoping Montgomery can be at least as good as most of the trash they have at the upper levels for a bit.
    Okay, then go sign Chris Tillman, Edwin Jackson, James Shields, or Yovani Gallardo. Its the same point. There are still tons of guys out there to fit whatever role they want Montgomery to play and it doesn't matter who it is since they're gonna finish 30 games out of the wildcard anyway.

    I can kind of buy the idea that they want to see if Montgomery can produce and pawn him off next year or something for slightly more than they would have gotten for Maldonado, but the notion that they had a *need* for him in order to keep their prospects down is ridiculous.

  2. #1862
    Arbitration Eligible Freshmaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    2,933
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,796
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    981
    Thanked in
    521 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Acuña’s Bat Flip View Post
    That is f'ing GOLD right there. AHAHAHAHA

  3. The Following User Says Thank You to Freshmaker For This Useful Post:

    Acuña’s Bat Flip (07-18-2019)

  4. #1863
    Arbitration Eligible
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    2,811
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    29
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    887
    Thanked in
    589 Posts
    Big news. Jace Peterson is available.

  5. #1864
    Boras' Client
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    swamps of S. Ga
    Posts
    4,197
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,121
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    572
    Thanked in
    399 Posts
    Phiiiies up 6=1 but can't hold it. Give 3 back. Now 6-4 in Top 4th with Dodgers still hitting

  6. #1865
    Boras' Client
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    swamps of S. Ga
    Posts
    4,197
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,121
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    572
    Thanked in
    399 Posts
    Now 6-5 in 5th. Phiiiies about to give this away also.

  7. #1866
    "What is a clvclv"
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Nebo, NC
    Posts
    9,634
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    5,354
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2,340
    Thanked in
    1,628 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by BeanieAntics View Post
    Okay, then go sign Chris Tillman, Edwin Jackson, James Shields, or Yovani Gallardo. Its the same point. There are still tons of guys out there to fit whatever role they want Montgomery to play and it doesn't matter who it is since they're gonna finish 30 games out of the wildcard anyway.

    I can kind of buy the idea that they want to see if Montgomery can produce and pawn him off next year or something for slightly more than they would have gotten for Maldonado, but the notion that they had a *need* for him in order to keep their prospects down is ridiculous.
    They have a "need" for ANYBODY to eat innings - just as the Braves did a few years ago, and it doesn't matter how they get those guys. Sorry, but I wasn't the only one that called your jumping up to call DMGM out for not following the precious charts a little ridiculous. Maldonado held absolutely no value to anyone else, and if Montgomery is as bad as you want to make him out to be you're making that argument by yourself.

    It was a trade of two inconsequential players - the reasoning behind the deal makes no difference other than the fact those teams' respective GMs wanted to make the trade. Caratini has been a better player than Maldonado this year, and Contreras will be back in 10 days.
    Has there EVER been a statement and question a certain someone should absolutely never have made and asked publicly more than...

    Kinda pathetic to see yourself as a message board knight in shining armor. How impotent does someone have to be in real life to resort to playing hero on a message board?

  8. #1867
    Hessmania Forever
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    13,994
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    4,887
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    7,678
    Thanked in
    4,941 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by salmagundy View Post
    Now 6-5 in 5th. Phiiiies about to give this away also.
    Beaty with a pinch-hit 3-run HR to put the Dodgers up 8-6.

  9. #1868
    Arbitration Eligible
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    3,381
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    68
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,171
    Thanked in
    773 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by clvclv View Post
    They have a "need" for ANYBODY to eat innings - just as the Braves did a few years ago, and it doesn't matter how they get those guys. Sorry, but I wasn't the only one that called your jumping up to call DMGM out for not following the precious charts a little ridiculous. Maldonado held absolutely no value to anyone else, and if Montgomery is as bad as you want to make him out to be you're making that argument by yourself.

    It was a trade of two inconsequential players - the reasoning behind the deal makes no difference other than the fact those teams' respective GMs wanted to make the trade. Caratini has been a better player than Maldonado this year, and Contreras will be back in 10 days.
    Maldonado = Asset. Asset = Value. His value was certainly limited, but I was questioning the idea of trading an asset for current value in lieu of future value. Others have pointed out that the Royals idea could be to build up his value so he could be traded for something more substantial later. That may or may not be a good strategy that I didn't consider. That does not mean that your point wasn't stupid. The idea of trading even a milkshake for someone just to keep your prospects down and eat innings is ridiculous when you're one of the worst teams in the league and there are several arms available for the league minimum.

    And I don't think I've insinuated anything about Montgomery being a bad pitcher. I would have said the same thing if they'd have gotten substantially better or substantially worse than Montgomery. The point wasn't that Montgomery is bad, its that he's less useful to the Royals than a 35 FV lottery ticket. Like I said, I hadn't considered them possibly flipping him at a later date, mostly because I hadn't realized that he had two years of arb. remaining, but that has nothing to do with your retort which remains bad.

  10. #1869
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    11,386
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2,392
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2,746
    Thanked in
    1,975 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by BeanieAntics View Post
    Maldonado = Asset. Asset = Value. His value was certainly limited, but I was questioning the idea of trading an asset for current value in lieu of future value. Others have pointed out that the Royals idea could be to build up his value so he could be traded for something more substantial later. That may or may not be a good strategy that I didn't consider. That does not mean that your point wasn't stupid. The idea of trading even a milkshake for someone just to keep your prospects down and eat innings is ridiculous when you're one of the worst teams in the league and there are several arms available for the league minimum.

    And I don't think I've insinuated anything about Montgomery being a bad pitcher. I would have said the same thing if they'd have gotten substantially better or substantially worse than Montgomery. The point wasn't that Montgomery is bad, its that he's less useful to the Royals than a 35 FV lottery ticket. Like I said, I hadn't considered them possibly flipping him at a later date, mostly because I hadn't realized that he had two years of arb. remaining, but that has nothing to do with your retort which remains bad.
    I disagree. Montgomery is likely to contribute to the Royals in some capacity, unless he's just completely washed up (certainly possible for a 30 year old pitcher). A 35 FV prospect is basically organizational filler.

  11. #1870
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    8,025
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,467
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,951
    Thanked in
    1,360 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by BeanieAntics View Post
    Maldonado = Asset. Asset = Value. His value was certainly limited, but I was questioning the idea of trading an asset for current value in lieu of future value. Others have pointed out that the Royals idea could be to build up his value so he could be traded for something more substantial later. That may or may not be a good strategy that I didn't consider. That does not mean that your point wasn't stupid. The idea of trading even a milkshake for someone just to keep your prospects down and eat innings is ridiculous when you're one of the worst teams in the league and there are several arms available for the league minimum.

    And I don't think I've insinuated anything about Montgomery being a bad pitcher. I would have said the same thing if they'd have gotten substantially better or substantially worse than Montgomery. The point wasn't that Montgomery is bad, its that he's less useful to the Royals than a 35 FV lottery ticket. Like I said, I hadn't considered them possibly flipping him at a later date, mostly because I hadn't realized that he had two years of arb. remaining, but that has nothing to do with your retort which remains bad.
    Montgomery had 1.5 WAR last year and MM had 1.7...this is a pretty inconsequential deal?
    "Well, you’ll learn soon enough that this was a massive red wave landslide." - thethe on the 2020 election that trump lost bigly

    “I can’t fix my life, but I can fix the world.” - sturg

  12. #1871
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    7,772
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    270
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,491
    Thanked in
    1,150 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Super View Post
    Montgomery had 1.5 WAR last year and MM had 1.7...this is a pretty inconsequential deal?
    Maldanado is a backup catcher who signed as a FA for 2.5m. That's the epitome of an inconsequential player.

    I don't think it's especially unlikely they could flip Montgomery for a 35+ down the road.

  13. #1872
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    8,025
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,467
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,951
    Thanked in
    1,360 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Southcack77 View Post
    Maldanado is a backup catcher who signed as a FA for 2.5m. That's the epitome of an inconsequential player.

    I don't think it's especially unlikely they could flip Montgomery for a 35+ down the road.
    yeah i don't think either team made any kind of mistake here lol
    "Well, you’ll learn soon enough that this was a massive red wave landslide." - thethe on the 2020 election that trump lost bigly

    “I can’t fix my life, but I can fix the world.” - sturg

  14. #1873
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    26,261
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    34
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    10,000
    Thanked in
    6,108 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Super View Post
    yeah i don't think either team made any kind of mistake here lol
    The mistake was someone suggesting KC acquired MM to eat innings.

    KC clearly thinks they can increase his value and get more than whatever Maldo could have gotten them. Decent idea even if they can't pull it off.

  15. The Following User Says Thank You to Enscheff For This Useful Post:

    Carp (07-17-2019)

  16. #1874
    Hessmania Forever
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    13,994
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    4,887
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    7,678
    Thanked in
    4,941 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Enscheff View Post
    The mistake was someone suggesting KC acquired MM to eat innings.

    KC clearly thinks they can increase his value and get more than whatever Maldo could have gotten them. Decent idea even if they can't pull it off.
    I didn't realize how lopsided his reverse splits were this season (and how terrible he's pitched overall). Splits are pretty even for his career. Curious to see if he figures into any deadline discussions. Wouldn't be a totally wrong-headed move by a contender to have Montgomery as the last guy in the bullpen. I just don't know what anyone would give up for him.

  17. #1875
    Arbitration Eligible
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    3,381
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    68
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,171
    Thanked in
    773 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Carp View Post
    I disagree. Montgomery is likely to contribute to the Royals in some capacity, unless he's just completely washed up (certainly possible for a 30 year old pitcher). A 35 FV prospect is basically organizational filler.
    Montgomery is almost certainly going to contribute to the Royals, but who cares? The Royals are going to be awful for the next 2.5 years. Like I said, I can see the argument that Montgomery could rebuild value and be flipped, but if the Royals idea was to trade for him and keep him for 2.5 years, then its a really dumb deal albeit relatively inconsequential, and the Royals would have been far better off getting the 35 FV prospect. At least that player would have a chance at being a contributor at some point on a contending team.

  18. #1876
    Arbitration Eligible
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    3,381
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    68
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,171
    Thanked in
    773 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Super View Post
    Montgomery had 1.5 WAR last year and MM had 1.7...this is a pretty inconsequential deal?
    As I said in the post above, my initial post was made without the knowledge that Montgomery still had two years of arb left. For some reason I had assumed that this was his walk year. Him having 2.5 years of control makes a lot more sense since it gives the Royals time to make another move for future value.

    But I don't think any deal is inconsequential in a rebuild. I think you need to search for value as often as you can. I would have been just as perplexed if the Braves had traded Dario Alvarez and Lucas Harrell for Tom Wilhelmsen or somebody like that instead of Travis Demeritte.

  19. The Following User Says Thank You to BeanieAntics For This Useful Post:

    jpx7 (07-17-2019)

  20. #1877
    Arbitration Eligible
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    3,381
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    68
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,171
    Thanked in
    773 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Southcack77 View Post
    Maldanado is a backup catcher who signed as a FA for 2.5m. That's the epitome of an inconsequential player.

    I don't think it's especially unlikely they could flip Montgomery for a 35+ down the road.
    If that is their plan, then it makes some sense.

    Once again, my first post was made with the assumption that Montgomery was entering free agency after this season. I still think that they could have gotten some lottery ticket from the Cubs for Maldonado, but 2.5 years of Montgomery might be a better idea.

  21. #1878
    Expects Yuge Games nsacpi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    47,432
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2,704
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    11,384
    Thanked in
    7,533 Posts
    Never in the long annals of mankind has something so inconsequential prompted such passionate discourse.
    "I am a victim, I will tell you. I am a victim."

    "I am your retribution."

  22. The Following User Says Thank You to nsacpi For This Useful Post:

    jpx7 (07-17-2019)

  23. #1879
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    8,025
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,467
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,951
    Thanked in
    1,360 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by BeanieAntics View Post
    As I said in the post above, my initial post was made without the knowledge that Montgomery still had two years of arb left. For some reason I had assumed that this was his walk year. Him having 2.5 years of control makes a lot more sense since it gives the Royals time to make another move for future value.

    But I don't think any deal is inconsequential in a rebuild. I think you need to search for value as often as you can. I would have been just as perplexed if the Braves had traded Dario Alvarez and Lucas Harrell for Tom Wilhelmsen or somebody like that instead of Travis Demeritte.
    it's extremely unlikely either of them will return anything that ends up being real value. both teams seem to have an idea. overall yeah it's pretty inconsequential.
    "Well, you’ll learn soon enough that this was a massive red wave landslide." - thethe on the 2020 election that trump lost bigly

    “I can’t fix my life, but I can fix the world.” - sturg

  24. #1880
    Shift Leader CyYoung31's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    24,244
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,032
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    9,990
    Thanked in
    5,481 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by nsacpi View Post
    Never in the long annals of mankind has something so inconsequential prompted such passionate discourse.
    Oh, I don’t know about that one, Chief.

Similar Threads

  1. 2019 BA Top 31
    By clvclv in forum 2023: Celebrating Our 10th Year Here
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-06-2019, 02:39 PM
  2. 2019 BA Top 100
    By clvclv in forum 2023: Celebrating Our 10th Year Here
    Replies: 87
    Last Post: 01-30-2019, 01:38 PM
  3. Starting Pitching in the Majors and Minors
    By nsacpi in forum Extented Spring Training
    Replies: 69
    Last Post: 09-07-2018, 04:54 PM
  4. Tyrell Jenkins promoted to the majors.
    By Heyward in forum 2023: Celebrating Our 10th Year Here
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 06-18-2016, 03:28 AM
  5. Starting Rotations in the Upper Minors and Majors
    By nsacpi in forum 2023: Celebrating Our 10th Year Here
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 12-22-2015, 12:40 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •