Official Offseason Thread

BeanieAntics said:
Yeah this is another point that isn't related to money at all. Why would he waive his opt out to get out of his current situation, to enter into a different situation that he knows nothing about, and lock himself in to that situation for the rest of his career. The opt out isn't exclusively about money, its also about getting out of a situation you don't want to be in. So the exact reason why people are saying he would waive his opt-out is the exact reason why he should keep it. Otherwise he's locking himself in to a situation that he may hate in a year's time.
Click to expand...

It's entirely possible that Arenado is only motivated by trying to get as high a score in money as possible.

Personally, I think the control over his circumstances is probably the much more important part of the equation to him. It would be to me, because the ability to leave is a safety valve and leverage.

Of course the leverage goes away when the team is no longer concerned with keeping you.

This is an unlikely scenario, but I don't think the idea is quite as stupid as you are trying to make civ feel. Things like this do happen on occasion.
 
Carp said:
You're arguing just to argue. The odds of winning the lottery are a fraction of 1 percent. To be more exact, for the Mega Millions it is roughly .00000003304692%. Sure it isn't technically zero, but it's close enough to say it's effectively zero and not to bother thinking of it as a plausible outcome.
Click to expand...

Yeah - cause there's absolutely no one else that does that around here.

(And I'm obviously alone since he went back to further try to pick apart the same post two posts after you said this. Pots - meet kettles.)
 
FWIW the Denver Post: Quoting an article from 3 days ago: A trade of Nolan Arenado becoming more likely every day 3 teams in the fore Texas, St Louis and Atlanta. This is not new info but at least it isn't coming from CNN
 
clvclv said:
Yeah - cause there's absolutely no one else that does that around here.

(And I'm obviously alone since he went back to further try to pick apart the same post two posts after you said this. Pots - meet kettles.)
Click to expand...

You are arguing over something as inconsequential as whether 0 actually means 0. There's a clear difference. Spirited debate is fun. You trying to argue over the meaning of 0 is just beyond stupid.
 
Jay212033 said:
Saw a proposal for Marte and Archer which would have us give up Inciarte, Wright, Wilson and Contreras if that all we had to give up I'd DEFINITELY be down for this deal.
Click to expand...

Jumpin Jaysus on a pogo stick, who made this up, PiratesMurph? We'd be giving up something on the order of $60-65 million in value and getting something on the order of $15-20 million.
 
Carp said:
You are arguing over something as inconsequential as whether 0 actually means 0. There's a clear difference. Spirited debate is fun. You trying to argue over the meaning of 0 is just beyond stupid.
Click to expand...

We're a page or so away from a literal argumentum ad dictionarium.
 
Southcack77 said:
It's entirely possible that Arenado is only motivated by trying to get as high a score in money as possible.

Personally, I think the control over his circumstances is probably the much more important part of the equation to him. It would be to me, because the ability to leave is a safety valve and leverage.

Of course the leverage goes away when the team is no longer concerned with keeping you.

This is an unlikely scenario, but I don't think the idea is quite as stupid as you are trying to make civ feel. Things like this do happen on occasion.
Click to expand...

Can you name an instance where a player gave away an opt out for precisely no monetary gain? I certainly can't recall any.

And if the ability to control his situation were so important to him, why would he just give away his ability to regain full control of his circumstances in two years for the pleasure of going to whatever team the Rockies decide to trade him to? Obviously his NTC gives him final say, but its entirely possible (within this impossible scenario) that he agrees to waive his NTC and opt out, goes to his new team, and absolutely hates it. At that point it would be tough titty because you just gave away your ability to opt out.

Usually I respect your tendency for contrarianism because I also have a natural skepticism towards orthodoxy, but I think you're way off the mark with this one. Waiving his opt out for no monetary gain just makes no sense.

I also think more people are motivated by the financial high score than you'd like to believe.
 
Southcack77 said:
It's entirely possible that Arenado is only motivated by trying to get as high a score in money as possible.

Personally, I think the control over his circumstances is probably the much more important part of the equation to him. It would be to me, because the ability to leave is a safety valve and leverage.

Of course the leverage goes away when the team is no longer concerned with keeping you.

This is an unlikely scenario, but I don't think the idea is quite as stupid as you are trying to make civ feel. Things like this do happen on occasion.
Click to expand...

so your argument is that Arenado may waive his opt-out in order to play for someone else other than Rockies, which he's able to do in 2 years anyway should he NOT waive his opt-out?

why would he sign his long-term, top-dollar deal in the first place?
why wouldn't he just wait and maintain complete control over his situation instead, and not potentially sacrifice a single dollar?

Arenado would have to be compensated, monetarily, to waive it. it's as simple as that. you say stuff like this has happened before - to what are you referring?

yes, players have taken team-friendly deals before. this is not in the same category. he JUST signed this deal, obviously going for the most money he could get. why would he suddenly have a change of heart?
 
BeanieAntics said:
Can you name an instance where a player gave away an opt out for precisely no monetary gain? I certainly can't recall any.
Click to expand...

he's using the ambiguous, lacking nuance explanation of "players have previously done things not in their best interest money-wise, therefore Arenado doing this specific thing that no one has ever done is somewhat reasonable." it's horse****, yes, but it's where we are.

as far as i know, Arenado hasn't even voiced the slightest displeasure with his situation. it's the same logic that led some people (ahem....) to believe JD would take a 20% discount to stay in Atlanta. it's nonsensical. the Braves wouldn't even ask Arenado to waive his opt-out for free, just to play in Atlanta, as that would be insulting. his agent would slam the phone down.
 
Last edited:
It's shocking how many people don't understand how player opt outs work, yet keep posting about it. Kinda like arguing with a flat earther.
 
BeanieAntics said:
I'll trade you clv and PawPaw for CrazyTrain, VirginaBrave, and SJ24. I know its a 3 for 2, but I feel like clv is at least worth Virginia and Taylor combined.

I'll talk to clv about waiving rhetorical questions, but I wouldn't get my hopes up. He really likes those things.
Click to expand...

What is his arguments above replacement number? Need to know if this is a good deal or not
 
ET™

Just wanted to get the trademark in for Expected Thanks. Gonna be yuge, including a yuge counterfeit market.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top