Does it matter??

[sturg33]

Why keep Freeman or Folty then? If we're not trying to be competitive anytime soon, they only hurt us as we shoot for the top pick.

Teams don't go from #1 pick to competitive overnight. The veterans are just placeholders.

It just cracks me up that the people saying it makes no sense to add veterans because it will lead to more wins are the same ones arguing that guys like Kemp and Markakis suck and aren't a positive on the major league roster.

Fielding a major league team full of AAAA guys and prospects who aren't ready yet so you can lose as many games as possible is just not going to happen. That crap doesn't even really work in basketball, and basketball rebuilds are WAY quicker.

I agree with signing people like Colon and Dickey.

What I don't see if where this ship turns around. There's just not enough position talent in this system.

The pitching is not the problem.

 

[CJ9]

What I don't see if where this ship turns around. There's just not enough position talent in this system.

This is where I'm at. The only potential difference-making position player above A ball is Albies. And it's not like there are a ton of difference makers in A ball, either.

 

[Julio3000]

Yeah, this is a concern. There's some exciting higher-ceiling position talent in the low minors, but nothing closer.

 

[TheBravos]

Why keep Freeman or Folty then? If we're not trying to be competitive anytime soon, they only hurt us as we shoot for the top pick.

Teams don't go from #1 pick to competitive overnight. The veterans are just placeholders.

It just cracks me up that the people saying it makes no sense to add veterans because it will lead to more wins are the same ones arguing that guys like Kemp and Markakis suck and aren't a positive on the major league roster.

Fielding a major league team full of AAAA guys and prospects who aren't ready yet so you can lose as many games as possible is just not going to happen. That crap doesn't even really work in basketball, and basketball rebuilds are WAY quicker.

I'll answer by each paragraph.

1. Because they are either signed long term or controlled long term (building blocks).

2. Yes, I think I was stated the vets were just place holders. Getting a few vets on a team to fill out holes is perfectly fine....I like Phillips holding for Ozzie and Colon and Dickey holding for our pitchers is perfectly fine. Signing or trading for a buttload of vets to only "appear" to be competitive on one year (or even worse four year) deals and in the process "maybe" winning another 5-10 games only hurts our draft spot. Having a loosing record or a better loosing record doesn't matter unless you are fielding a young team that is showing improvement.

3. I like Kemp and Markakis. I have defended both at times. It does blow my mind clearing the BJ contract in the Kimbrel deal, only to go drop $40 mil on Markakis. I like Markakis, but he should not be on our rebuilding team.

4. I guess it depends on what you consider AAAA guys, because I feel we have already done that to a degree. Boni? Peterson? I could name 8-10 guys that should be in AAA and I could name 8-10 guys in AAA that probably deserve a better chance to be in the majors.

My reply to this? You could take the Kemp and Markakis money and spend it on some younger building block type players. I have to say if they trade at least Colon, Dickey, etc. (and I like those guys)....I'll be ok. If they keep them the whole year, it will be maddening

 

[Knucksie]

The problem IMO has always been the whole philosophy of a reload or short rebuild,

You've said this at least 25 times, and it's not even remotely close to the truth. They haven't reloaded since around 2005. Going out and getting JD Drew and Teixeira is reloading. Relieving both Uptons, Heywood, Simmons, Kimbrel and sprinkling in a couple of other veterans on short term deals to try and field a semi-watchable team in a new park is still being in rebuild mode.

This is a good topic, but it's invited the same frustrated rant responses.

 

[smootness]

I'll answer by each paragraph.

1. Because they are either signed long term or controlled long term (building blocks).

2. Yes, I think I was stated the vets were just place holders. Getting a few vets on a team to fill out holes is perfectly fine....I like Phillips holding for Ozzie and Colon and Dickey holding for our pitchers is perfectly fine. Signing or trading for a buttload of vets to only "appear" to be competitive on one year (or even worse four year) deals and in the process "maybe" winning another 5-10 games only hurts our draft spot. Having a loosing record or a better loosing record doesn't matter unless you are fielding a young team that is showing improvement.

3. I like Kemp and Markakis. I have defended both at times. It does blow my mind clearing the BJ contract in the Kimbrel deal, only to go drop $40 mil on Markakis. I like Markakis, but he should not be on our rebuilding team.

4. I guess it depends on what you consider AAAA guys, because I feel we have already done that to a degree. Boni? Peterson? I could name 8-10 guys that should be in AAA and I could name 8-10 guys in AAA that probably deserve a better chance to be in the majors.

My reply to this? You could take the Kemp and Markakis money and spend it on some younger building block type players. I have to say if they trade at least Colon, Dickey, etc. (and I like those guys)....I'll be ok. If they keep them the whole year, it will be maddening

I absolutely want is to trade the vet pitchers, and I can't imagine we won't if given the chance.

But what young building block type players are available to sign? Those guys aren't there, and in the rare case they are, they get a crap ton of money.

 

[The Tariff King]

Ahh 2005. When JS kept telling the media we were reloading not rebuilding. And Mets fans were jealous of us because we won the division title and they were chattering of how we set ourself up to win the division for the next 5 years and Minaya was garbage. Oh how that didn't turn out.