OT: Raise the Jolly Roger: Congrats to the Houston Cheaters on their win

  • Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.


2 years and $25 million for Heaney alone would have been fine, getting that plus an opt out and $15 million in potential performance bonuses is downright lunacy.

I'm terrified to see what a potential Quintana contract looks like. Prices are completely crazy this off-season.
 
A little surprised by Bellinger to the Cubs, though not so much in the sense that the Cubs have money to burn and are a good bet to end up with one of the shortstops.

Probably a decent thing in terms of any prospective Reynolds trade. The more teams that snap up OFs who wouldn't be good suitors for Reynolds, probably the better. I think the Giants could put together an ok package, but that's one reason I would like to see Judge end up in SF. Judge going to SF might also get LAD to be more in the mix for Reynolds, though Friedman really does just do things at his own pace and in his own way.

I think probably the best case for leverage is Judge to SF and Nimmo somewhere other than NYY. That would then maybe position them to spend a lot on Correa and look to a trade for Reynolds as another big move, maybe allowing them to either budge on Volpe (I truly doubt it) or willing to include multiple of their secondary pieces if he's untouchable. Walking away with Peraza, Cabrera ++ wouldn't be terrible.
 
I think the only reason I'd choose Bellinger over those guys is because I'd be acquiring Bellinger to play CF, while I'm not sure if the other two are viable CF options. I think Galllo is much more likely to be that than Conforto.

Gallo's tough to evaluate, he has 2 gold gloves but I believe those were in RF, not CF.



What a dumb comparison. The Pirates got what they got for Cole because they were targeting win-now pieces to try and maintain a mediocre team.

How you think that's a more appropriate comparison than Castillo, who brought back a top-15 prospect, or Soto, who brought back a literal fortune of assets, is just dumb.
Comparing Bryan Reynolds to Juan Soto? Lol… Reynolds isn’t in the same world as Soto
 
No idea what is entailed, but I think they are streaming the lotto on mlb.com if anyone wants to be masochistic and see us also drop to a bad pick on top of all this Reynolds BS.
 


A lot hinges on health and performance with any non-phenom MLB Draft, but this seems like a year where, assuming you want college bats, it's a good one to be somewhere in any of the picks we can end up with (1-9), and really good to be 1 or 2. It'd be a relief to be guaranteed Crews (and also fun for the Cruz/Crews link), and people are really exuberant about Dollander.
 
Stop making sense.

The Kody Duncan's and Brian Cornell's have the stage with sources, hopes and dreams and many hours on OOTB and EA Sports.

There will be no Quintana (we're not making him the richest FA signing in history, as that's what it would cost, thanks for playing).

Yep, the 2 1B we signed were upgrades but not real needle movers considering they're not THAT good and play 1B/DH. Those players, unless superstars don't bring you more wins. It's marginally plus but comfortably marginal.

Vince Vquez (bum) and Garcia are the arms brought in thus far, meaning, we have less cash to spend than we did yesterday, which wasn't much to begin with.

This is the same owner, the same FO, the same bench staff, and the same damn song and dance all over again. Just like Cole, Reynolds will be basically given away relative to what we would have gotten a year ago at his peak.

Cherington kept him knowing this would happen and did so because it is a deliberate operating instruction from the folks who run MLB and the biggest market owners.

Comparing Bryan Reynolds to Juan Soto? Lol… Reynolds isn’t in the same world as Soto
 
No need to overstate the obvious of how good this news is. Before that weird ceremony, I was thinking that I'd gladly just opt out and stick with our pick (easy to say with a top-3 pick), but it does seem like there could be a top tier forming with Crews and Dollander.

I haven't really done that much more than half-assedly read about the draft, but it's a little too early for me to conclude that, as basically with the draft, performance can swing how it actually looks next summer, and injuries loom large especially for pitchers. The people who like Dollander really like him (I think Prospects Live has him 1.1 and is over the moon about him), but to me, unless his somehow takes a step back, Crews is the very obvious choice.

He was already a top-10 talent out of HS and has crushed it at LSU. He's basically an all-around threat who will provide plus defense in a corner OF spot with power, speed, and a good hit tool. He'll move pretty quickly and is exactly the kind of pick that would fit in well with where the organization is at (he also plays CF now in college, and IMO will be a real slam dunk 1.1 if everybody is fully sold on him at CF for a while in MLB, as that's basically young George Springer...). There are a couple of prep guys who people seem to like, but I don't even think that should be an option at 1.1. The only other sense I've gotten is that the top group of college hitters is really stacked, which is why a pick in the 3-6 zone wouldn't have been a disaster.

There might be some makings for another Davis type situation where money is spread to later picks, but it's too early to ballpark that kind of thing. Getting the pick is also pretty important for determining the draft pool. It would have been a pretty decent blow to the whole thing had we moved down to 6-9, because then unless I misunderstand the process, all of our other picks in later rounds are also in that slot. Now we're at the top of the rounds. Not a total dominant position due to our competitive balance pick being in round B (essentially the start of round 3), but no way to complain about the best case scenario.
 
No need to overstate the obvious of how good this news is. Before that weird ceremony, I was thinking that I'd gladly just opt out and stick with our pick (easy to say with a top-3 pick), but it does seem like there could be a top tier forming with Crews and Dollander.

I haven't really done that much more than half-assedly read about the draft, but it's a little too early for me to conclude that, as basically with the draft, performance can swing how it actually looks next summer, and injuries loom large especially for pitchers. The people who like Dollander really like him (I think Prospects Live has him 1.1 and is over the moon about him), but to me, unless his somehow takes a step back, Crews is the very obvious choice.

He was already a top-10 talent out of HS and has crushed it at LSU. He's basically an all-around threat who will provide plus defense in a corner OF spot with power, speed, and a good hit tool. He'll move pretty quickly and is exactly the kind of pick that would fit in well with where the organization is at (he also plays CF now in college, and IMO will be a real slam dunk 1.1 if everybody is fully sold on him at CF for a while in MLB, as that's basically young George Springer...). There are a couple of prep guys who people seem to like, but I don't even think that should be an option at 1.1. The only other sense I've gotten is that the top group of college hitters is really stacked, which is why a pick in the 3-6 zone wouldn't have been a disaster.

There might be some makings for another Davis type situation where money is spread to later picks, but it's too early to ballpark that kind of thing. Getting the pick is also pretty important for determining the draft pool. It would have been a pretty decent blow to the whole thing had we moved down to 6-9, because then unless I misunderstand the process, all of our other picks in later rounds are also in that slot. Now we're at the top of the rounds. Not a total dominant position due to our competitive balance pick being in round B (essentially the start of round 3), but no way to complain about the best case scenario.

I don't think you can do that with how damn good the top-2 guys seem to be this year. In Davis' draft year, it wasn't really clear who the best prospect was and all of the guys had some sort of concerns. Dollander's numbers last year at Tennessee were insane (although they weren't very good for Georgia Southern as a freshman) and Crews has hit the crap out of the ball at LSU.
 
I don't think you can do that with how damn good the top-2 guys seem to be this year. In Davis' draft year, it wasn't really clear who the best prospect was and all of the guys had some sort of concerns. Dollander's numbers last year at Tennessee were insane (although they weren't very good for Georgia Southern as a freshman) and Crews has hit the crap out of the ball at LSU.
Yeah, it would be too much of a galaxy brain move. Even if we entertain it for the sake of argument, given our comp B pick this year, there's no real room for another unicorn scenario like what happened in the Davis draft. It'd maybe be like that except without Chandler.

The draft is reportedly very deep, but the current top tier is a notch above recent years according to basically anyone that I've read. Even if Dollander got hurt, it would just suck for Washington and Crews would be a slam dunk.

I think Crews is pretty much a slam dunk, but philosophically I've moved back off taking SP so high when there is a comparable college bat. Crews is comfortably 60/60/60 hit, power, speed. I think there's too much that can go wrong even with bad luck to take an SP over that profile. There's no need to declare tonight.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WheresRamziAbid
The big thing I don't understand with Crews is why so many places are saying that he's destined for RF. Most scouting reports seem to suggest that he has great speed and a terrific arm, but does that mean he wouldn't be viable defensively in CF or that he's more suited defensively in RF? There's a pretty massive difference there.

A plus defender in RF doesn't necessarily mean he wouldn't fit as a CF. It seems like a lot of the top CF prospects (namely Hassell III and Dominguez) have that comment, but I don't know "he's suited for RF" means "he isn't suited for CF".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad