Search results

I wouldn't normally see Tanner Scott as a big signing, but Alex has shown a willingness to pay for relievers. Does anyone think he might convert to starter? That seems to be the rage. Makes sense when you only have to get through order twice these days, I guess.

I also was confused. Padres Kim was who I was referring to. Such similar names.

No it's the fact that he gets sexual pleasure from beating up and degrading women. If that's something you enjoy you're an awful person. It probably extends into the rest of your world too.

I feel like this is the same fan base that pretended to want to run Ozuna out of town for sone light domestic violence, but apparently is ok with sexual sadism.

If the added Profar and Kim a reliever, and a rotation starter that would be a whole lot. So wouldn't say that there is nothing out there.

If you are going to do something that hurts then might as well trade Baldwin. The Braves will need the pitching before the window closes.

Can he play LF?

For me, I think it's somewhat unfair that short career pitchers get in sometimes and position players do not. I feel like Murphy was better than his peers that got in, but they held on longer to help counting stats.

Not to Beltran, Abreu and Buehler. I don't think any of them should be close. Feel about the same about Utley. The steroid guys are obvious yes's but for the steroids. I am unsympathetic to their plight.

If you're trying to win you probably would. And my assumption is you'd try to get a lower cost player with more than one year of control at a position of need. Else why would you need to throw in that surplus value.

I guess, but do people think Baldwin is going to be the centerpiece of a WS team after the current core is gone? I don't see the timing working out for keeping him to make much sense.

That's his obvious role for about four years.

Juice.

You absolutely can trade a backup catcher IMO.

I think a possible backup catcher could be moved for much less than a top 10 player.

To me it seems the most likely result is that Acuña is still a really good player and the chance he just sucks now forever is about 3%.

That's interesting to me and I didn't know that. I would have assumed they would be taxed in their state of residence regardless as it's a salary rather than a per diem or single event contract. Is that specific to professional athletes?

Pretty rare that any team solves two position problems in one trade.

I'm not sure "losing Travis to FA" is the correct frame to the Braves declining a team option.

Also, while the risk of Soto falling apart for whatever reason is tremendous, that's present whether there is an opt out or not. While it is certainly to the player's favor to have the opt out to get more money or more years or just change scenery, it should be a minor concern for the team...