"While Stanton has decent stats at Fenway, with 100 ABs whoever called him the best of all time sounds like they were suffering from a massive hallucination."
Again, they threw out some crazy high # for something.
Didn't sound like it was without some basis in fact.
"Sox are in last place - they are sellers, not buyers. They don't need any of those guys. And Devers isn't a free agent so why are they trading him?"
Devers is a free agent after next yr.
Getting Stanton now for Devers is a win next 4-ish yrs/+.
Disagree they could not use Hicks. Their OF sucks ass and needs speed, Bradley not withstanding.
They could make a commitment to either/both Devers/Bogarts, but have not.
What does that tell you?
"Washington doesn't want any contracts unless they are high end, cost controlled prospects at the beginning of their career (they are selling the team). In fact whoever gets Soto is likely getting stuck with Corbin and/or possibly Strasberg. So for your top 3-4 prospects, you can land Soto for 2 years, the NL's worst pitcher in Corbin who you'll owe $70 million over the next 2.5 years and the privilege of signing Soto to a $450+ million deal."
I didn't develop the follow thru of say that I had.
I only said that Devers is a signif get for Nats (esp w/a year to sign long term and all of next yr as a backup plan is to jettson as a rental),
Nats asking a good player, player(s) + prospects [+ likely as you said ditching Corbin $$$].
Devers is a signif enuf add reduces some of what else goes other way to DC
dat's all I'm sayin