talshill
Arbitration Eligible
Vini, vici, pavori.
Posts: 2,015
Likes: 1,115
|
Post by talshill on Nov 27, 2024 16:50:28 GMT -6
"The team has continued to succeed these last two years in spite of what he's been doing, not because of it (thanks to Luhnow having built this franchise into the titan it was)."So the only credit you give Crane is for hiring Luhnow? You can't give somebody all of the blame and none of the credit. It was a complete culture shift when he took over, and he has hired the right people to keep things going ever since letting Luhnow go. It's not like he made one good hire and Luhnow did everything else. There has been one consistent leader through all of this run and it's Crane. "The goal IMO should either be to be legitimate competitors, or forgo technical competitiveness in favor of building to future legitimate competitiveness."So even though we have seen repeatedly over the years that anything can happen in the postseason, you're saying that unless we're a heavy obvious favorite to win the WS that we shouldn't bother trying to get to the playoffs? "I fully expected this team to never need to do a full rebuild ever again."See but that's wrong. There is no franchise in history that didn't go through periods of regrowth/rebuild. Maybe Luhnow could have extended this run and maybe not. Luhnow deserves a ton of credit, but let's not forget that he also made some pretty bad decisions as well (Fiers?), and his inability to control the sign-stealing helped our decline to the farm system by losing so many high level draft picks. As smart as he is, he wasn't without fault either. Crane did his job well when he hired Luhnow and let him do his thing. Hiring Click was another good job, but then he started to meddle. You're right, it was a complete culture shift away from meddlesome ownership to wise, removed ownership. The problem is that now, the culture has shifted back. But I do give Crane some credit for these last two seasons: Crane did a good job hiring Luhnow and letting him work --> Luhnow's work is the reason we have been successful even to the point of this past season --> therefore Crane gets some credit for last season, but it's indirect credit. The good parts of the team are the parts built by actual GMs. The bad parts are the parts where he went out and tried to be his own GM. If you hired a good contractor to build you a house, you get some credit for doing your homework to pick out the right person and then letting him do his good work. You don't get credit for the literal building of the house. You don't go around bragging about how great of an architect you are. But if you hire the right guy and either try to micromanage things, or just partway fire the guy and try to DIY it yourself, and things fall apart, you do get blame for that. So yeah, you can get blame for things going wrong and not credit for things going right. I don't see what the problem is with that concept. Again, an owner's job is to hire a good GM and then get out of his way. Crane did a good job in the past. In the present, not so much. You can try to get to the playoffs without doing a deal like Kikuchi. But there's so much nuance to the thing. If the Astros had a thriving farm system and hadn't lost so many picks, including one for signing their stupidly expensive closer, and so you wouldn't notice the loss of guys like Wagner and Bloss, then it wouldn't be so bad. So the question is very situational. What I can say is that, given the whole of the Astros' situation, no, they should not trade three of their best remaining prospects for a couple of months of a guy they have no intention of retaining in order to boost the WS championship odds of their flawed, significantly underperforming team by maybe a couple of percentage points. Note: I did specifically say FULL rebuild. Even the best teams do need periods to not be as super competitive and reload for a year or two. Sure. But what I'm saying is that the moves we've seen over the last couple of years make this team look more and more like a FULL rebuild will be needed. I'm talking about multiple seasons where we go into the year knowing there is no chance to even compete for a division title. More to the point though, is there no franchise in history because it's actually impossible, or is there no franchise in history because ownership makes bad decisions and won't stay the course? My view is that we had the best GM in sports history and we could have been the first, if ownership had not gotten a big head. We will never know now. I can’t speak for Crane; maybe he did or does get too much into meddling in GM affairs after Luhnow got the boot. I never heard such allegations while Luhnow was here. If so it’s sort of understandable in a way because his team had just been involved in a cheating scandal. Maybe he felt like he should take a more active role in the management of his most valuable asset to avoid future embarrassment. If I trusted a financial advisor (which I don’t have, BTW) to oversee, say, 60% of my net worth and later discovered that rules were broken under his watch that threatened the viability of my assets I’d sure become more involved with the next advisor after I fired the original. Perhaps Click chafed under Crane’s oversight and “meddling”. Dunno. I do know that Click committed the unpardonable sin by bad-mouthing his boss in public which is a very fast way to get your pass to the executive washroom revoked. I don’t know Crane or what sort of man he is, what sort of leader he is, whether he’s a jerk, etc. I don’t know what role he had in letting certain players go. Don’t know how much, if any at all, input from Bagwell or Jackson had with him. I do know that he’s had one of the highest payrolls in baseball and has even stated he’d be willing to go over the luxury tax even more next year. Under his ownership we’ve been to the playoffs nine times in ten years, won 2 WS, 4 AL penants and have generally been the most feared team in the game for the better part of a decade. Compared to what we’ve had in the past (once being owned by Ford Motor Credit for a time- what a disaster) I’ll take Crane 10 out of 10 times. I mean you obviously don’t have to but I’d cut the man some slack if I were you. |
|
|
|
Post by Ashitaka on Nov 27, 2024 17:07:53 GMT -6
I don't think Arenado will come particularly cheaply, which would be my main issue with it. Todd laid out the case for him pretty well. One part he didn't mention is health; Arenado has never had a major injury, and has reached 600+ PA in his last NINE consecutive seasons (aside from 2020 of course). In a world where quality, consistent 3B is really rare, he still has significant value. So don't expect a pure salary dump. But they won't be able to get premium prospects either unless they pay some serious part of the money. By the way, for those unaware, because of the contract's structure, Arenado's AAV tax hit is a little over $30 million. And no matter how much of his salary is paid by the Cardinals, the team that gets him will still have that full $30 million counted against them. So if the Astros were to acquire Arenado, he would essentially affect their luxury tax concerns just as much as if they signed Bregman to a $180 million over six year contract. And they'd lose whatever prospects they had to deal to get Arenado. And while still good, Arenado is obviously not as good as Bregman at this point in their careers. So the only benefit would be that Arenado is only under contract for three years vs. Bregman being twice that or more. Are you sure about the salary portion? Because my impression has always been that if a player making, say, $20M gets traded and the trading team agrees to pay like $10M then each team is responsible for paying $10M and that’s the amount that counts against their respective total team salaries. I will admit that I am not certain, but I think I'm right. Current MLB.com rules: www.mlb.com/glossary/transactions/competitive-balance-tax"A team's Competitive Balance Tax figure is determined using the average annual value of each player's contract on the 40-man roster, plus any additional player benefits. Every team's final CBT figure is calculated at the end of each season." No mention of the AAV being lowered because another team is paying some of the player's salary. Which is an argument from silence of course, but I think it's notable. I believe the way it's viewed is that Team A sends Player X and additionally Cash Considerations Y to Team B in exchange for prospects A B and C or whatever. So I think the owner basically gets the money, which means he doesn't have to pay as much out of pocket for the salary, but the player and all his services are his, so the player's full salary is counted against the team on whose roster he is at the end of the season. Google's AI and ChatGPT also confirm that this is how it works. I think it makes sense; since the CBT limits are set supposedly to stop big teams from scoping up all the best players, if you could get a good player and not have him count against that limit, it would be circumventing the whole intention of the system. So I'd say I'm 95% sure, but I remain open to a more definitive source. |
|
|
|
Post by Saint on Nov 27, 2024 21:53:00 GMT -6
"The team has continued to succeed these last two years in spite of what he's been doing, not because of it (thanks to Luhnow having built this franchise into the titan it was)."So the only credit you give Crane is for hiring Luhnow? You can't give somebody all of the blame and none of the credit. It was a complete culture shift when he took over, and he has hired the right people to keep things going ever since letting Luhnow go. It's not like he made one good hire and Luhnow did everything else. There has been one consistent leader through all of this run and it's Crane. "The goal IMO should either be to be legitimate competitors, or forgo technical competitiveness in favor of building to future legitimate competitiveness."So even though we have seen repeatedly over the years that anything can happen in the postseason, you're saying that unless we're a heavy obvious favorite to win the WS that we shouldn't bother trying to get to the playoffs? "I fully expected this team to never need to do a full rebuild ever again."See but that's wrong. There is no franchise in history that didn't go through periods of regrowth/rebuild. Maybe Luhnow could have extended this run and maybe not. Luhnow deserves a ton of credit, but let's not forget that he also made some pretty bad decisions as well (Fiers?), and his inability to control the sign-stealing helped our decline to the farm system by losing so many high level draft picks. As smart as he is, he wasn't without fault either. Crane did his job well when he hired Luhnow and let him do his thing. Hiring Click was another good job, but then he started to meddle. You're right, it was a complete culture shift away from meddlesome ownership to wise, removed ownership. The problem is that now, the culture has shifted back. But I do give Crane some credit for these last two seasons: Crane did a good job hiring Luhnow and letting him work --> Luhnow's work is the reason we have been successful even to the point of this past season --> therefore Crane gets some credit for last season, but it's indirect credit. The good parts of the team are the parts built by actual GMs. The bad parts are the parts where he went out and tried to be his own GM. If you hired a good contractor to build you a house, you get some credit for doing your homework to pick out the right person and then letting him do his good work. You don't get credit for the literal building of the house. You don't go around bragging about how great of an architect you are. But if you hire the right guy and either try to micromanage things, or just partway fire the guy and try to DIY it yourself, and things fall apart, you do get blame for that. So yeah, you can get blame for things going wrong and not credit for things going right. I don't see what the problem is with that concept. Again, an owner's job is to hire a good GM and then get out of his way. Crane did a good job in the past. In the present, not so much. You can try to get to the playoffs without doing a deal like Kikuchi. But there's so much nuance to the thing. If the Astros had a thriving farm system and hadn't lost so many picks, including one for signing their stupidly expensive closer, and so you wouldn't notice the loss of guys like Wagner and Bloss, then it wouldn't be so bad. So the question is very situational. What I can say is that, given the whole of the Astros' situation, no, they should not trade three of their best remaining prospects for a couple of months of a guy they have no intention of retaining in order to boost the WS championship odds of their flawed, significantly underperforming team by maybe a couple of percentage points. Note: I did specifically say FULL rebuild. Even the best teams do need periods to not be as super competitive and reload for a year or two. Sure. But what I'm saying is that the moves we've seen over the last couple of years make this team look more and more like a FULL rebuild will be needed. I'm talking about multiple seasons where we go into the year knowing there is no chance to even compete for a division title. More to the point though, is there no franchise in history because it's actually impossible, or is there no franchise in history because ownership makes bad decisions and won't stay the course? My view is that we had the best GM in sports history and we could have been the first, if ownership had not gotten a big head. We will never know now. So are you saying you don't like Brown or you don't think Crane is letting Brown do his GM work? Because Crane was only the interim GM for two short free agent deals. He didn't do anything else in between all of the GMs. We still have an analytics department that is apparently very good (even JV told the Mets this when he left). So he did good with Luhnow, he did good with Click, he kept a lot of what they built, so are you saying Brown is no good or that he's still meddling? Which part since losing Click is him trying to do it himself outside of those two free deals? "What I can say is that, given the whole of the Astros' situation, no, they should not trade three of their best remaining prospects for a couple of months of a guy they have no intention of retaining in order to boost the WS championship odds of their flawed, significantly underperforming team by maybe a couple of percentage points."Agree to disagree. It was obvious they needed pitching help for their postseason run and they got it. It was the right move for the arguably 3rd or 4th best team in the AL to bolster their WS chances. They just didn't win. So being a division leader and top-5 (at worst) team in the league isn't worthy of trying to succeed in the postseason? "My view is that we had the best GM in sports history and we could have been the first, if ownership had not gotten a big head. We will never know now."There have been a lot of smart GMs in the history of sports. The odds of us having the perfect one seem pretty slim, especially considering he had already made mistakes on his own. Not even getting into his role as a leader during the sign-stealing, he traded a lot of prospects for guys like Kazmir, Fiers, Sneed, and Greinke that didn't work out very well from a value standpoint. Maybe more but those were questionable ones that I can remember. If we're going to say that Crane has been flawed; Luhnow was flawed also. It's hard for me to believe that we would never have seen a rebuild under Luhnow, especially with losing the draft picks that we did from the sign-stealing. |
|
|
|
Post by Ashitaka on Nov 28, 2024 21:26:53 GMT -6
Crane did his job well when he hired Luhnow and let him do his thing. Hiring Click was another good job, but then he started to meddle. You're right, it was a complete culture shift away from meddlesome ownership to wise, removed ownership. The problem is that now, the culture has shifted back. But I do give Crane some credit for these last two seasons: Crane did a good job hiring Luhnow and letting him work --> Luhnow's work is the reason we have been successful even to the point of this past season --> therefore Crane gets some credit for last season, but it's indirect credit. The good parts of the team are the parts built by actual GMs. The bad parts are the parts where he went out and tried to be his own GM. If you hired a good contractor to build you a house, you get some credit for doing your homework to pick out the right person and then letting him do his good work. You don't get credit for the literal building of the house. You don't go around bragging about how great of an architect you are. But if you hire the right guy and either try to micromanage things, or just partway fire the guy and try to DIY it yourself, and things fall apart, you do get blame for that. So yeah, you can get blame for things going wrong and not credit for things going right. I don't see what the problem is with that concept. Again, an owner's job is to hire a good GM and then get out of his way. Crane did a good job in the past. In the present, not so much. You can try to get to the playoffs without doing a deal like Kikuchi. But there's so much nuance to the thing. If the Astros had a thriving farm system and hadn't lost so many picks, including one for signing their stupidly expensive closer, and so you wouldn't notice the loss of guys like Wagner and Bloss, then it wouldn't be so bad. So the question is very situational. What I can say is that, given the whole of the Astros' situation, no, they should not trade three of their best remaining prospects for a couple of months of a guy they have no intention of retaining in order to boost the WS championship odds of their flawed, significantly underperforming team by maybe a couple of percentage points. Note: I did specifically say FULL rebuild. Even the best teams do need periods to not be as super competitive and reload for a year or two. Sure. But what I'm saying is that the moves we've seen over the last couple of years make this team look more and more like a FULL rebuild will be needed. I'm talking about multiple seasons where we go into the year knowing there is no chance to even compete for a division title. More to the point though, is there no franchise in history because it's actually impossible, or is there no franchise in history because ownership makes bad decisions and won't stay the course? My view is that we had the best GM in sports history and we could have been the first, if ownership had not gotten a big head. We will never know now. So are you saying you don't like Brown or you don't think Crane is letting Brown do his GM work? Because Crane was only the interim GM for two short free agent deals. He didn't do anything else in between all of the GMs. We still have an analytics department that is apparently very good (even JV told the Mets this when he left). So he did good with Luhnow, he did good with Click, he kept a lot of what they built, so are you saying Brown is no good or that he's still meddling? Which part since losing Click is him trying to do it himself outside of those two free deals? "What I can say is that, given the whole of the Astros' situation, no, they should not trade three of their best remaining prospects for a couple of months of a guy they have no intention of retaining in order to boost the WS championship odds of their flawed, significantly underperforming team by maybe a couple of percentage points."Agree to disagree. It was obvious they needed pitching help for their postseason run and they got it. It was the right move for the arguably 3rd or 4th best team in the AL to bolster their WS chances. They just didn't win. So being a division leader and top-5 (at worst) team in the league isn't worthy of trying to succeed in the postseason? "My view is that we had the best GM in sports history and we could have been the first, if ownership had not gotten a big head. We will never know now."There have been a lot of smart GMs in the history of sports. The odds of us having the perfect one seem pretty slim, especially considering he had already made mistakes on his own. Not even getting into his role as a leader during the sign-stealing, he traded a lot of prospects for guys like Kazmir, Fiers, Sneed, and Greinke that didn't work out very well from a value standpoint. Maybe more but those were questionable ones that I can remember. If we're going to say that Crane has been flawed; Luhnow was flawed also. It's hard for me to believe that we would never have seen a rebuild under Luhnow, especially with losing the draft picks that we did from the sign-stealing. Jury is still out on Brown, but I've been unimpressed with him at the MLB level (I don't love his drafts quite as much, but they look fine so far and he lost a pick last time). I think the question is how much of what he does is what he really thinks is best vs. how much of a yes man he is. Click mouthing off publicly only sped up the inevitable; Crane was looking for a reason to replace him. Crane wanted his big closer (Hendriks) and some other guys too, like Marte, and Click wouldn't do it. Brown gets hired, suddenly they make the JV trade and sign the big closer (Hader). How much of that is Brown vs. Crane is hard to know exactly. So we'll see what happens long-term. At the very least, there hasn't been another utter disaster like Abreu and Montero since he took over, so there's some hope in that. Again, it's not a simple yes/no IMO like you're asking. There are a lot of factors. They may have been top-5, but it's clear there was a huge gap between them and the real top, unlike previous seasons. This was a team decimated by injuries and floundering routinely on offense with a shaky back-end of the bullpen that was supposed to be a great strength. Another factor: with where they were in the standings and the current playoff structure, they were not going to get that first round bye, which is a massive deal. Another factor: in the past their farm had excess talent and the MLB roster wasn't as old (needing the farm to replace aging and departing core pieces). Again, when you put it all together, if they did the Kikuchi move knowing they would make no real attempt to retain him beyond 2024, I think it was a poor decision. You seem to be in the "go for it under any circumstance and worry about the fallout later" camp. As you said, agree to disagree. There's no such thing as a perfect GM. Luhnow made mistakes. Everyone does. But he was the best IMO. Some of the moves you bring up, again, at that time, young team, stacked farm, you can lose some prospects. That's what I'm saying. It's not a one-size-fits-all strategy. Not to mention that due to injuries in 2017 we probably miss the playoffs without Fiers (unless you're saying he should have predicted him ratting out a cheating scheme he likely didn't know was even going on), and Greinke did well for us for multiple seasons (and nearly clinched the 2019 WS) in exchange for prospects everyone knew had issues (and 3 for 4 who indeed busted completely). Again, we likely would have eventually needed a soft reset period just because Crane can't/won't go full Dodgers, but it likely wouldn't be a total crash, and considering his track record, there's no one I'd trust more to make the most of it and get the team through it ASAP. |
|
|
|
Post by abregmanfan on Nov 29, 2024 16:32:04 GMT -6
I am probably the biggest Bregman fan on here. Having said that, he is not worth a long term investment. I would maybe consider a 5 year deal at most. I hate to see core players leave but I am pretty sure I can change my name on here. Go Stros.
|
|
|
|
Post by thomasj13 on Nov 29, 2024 17:51:17 GMT -6
I am probably the biggest Bregman fan on here. Having said that, he is not worth a long term investment. I would maybe consider a 5 year deal at most. I hate to see core players leave but I am pretty sure I can change my name on here. Go Stros. I’m For up to six years |
|
|
|
Post by thomasj13 on Nov 30, 2024 4:54:06 GMT -6
Any thoughts to signing Tyler O’Neil to a 3 year/$50M deal?
That would help trading away Tucker and getting a top haul for him. Plus could lead to trading away Valdez as well
Tucker to Phillies for Painter or Abel + Crawford - To get Future Ace + Top OF prospect
Valdez + McCormick or Meyers to Red Sox for Roman Anthony + David Sandlin - To get another top OF prospect + Backend Starter
Package of Pressly + Meyers or McCormick + Prospects that can be traded (Leon)
Away to the Orioles for Mountcastle anf Mullins - To get a 2 year option at 1B and 2025 LH OF.
Sign Tommy Kahlne - Reliever 2 year deal
Sign Verlander - 1 year $12.5 M deal + incentives/2nd year team option
Re-sign Bregman- 5 or 6 year deal
2025
Altuve
Bregman
Alvarez
O’Neil
Mullins or Diaz
Diaz or Mullins
Mountcastle
Pena
Anthony
Key Bench - Dubon, Caratini, Singleton, Whitcomb, Dezenzo, Crawford (at some point),
2026
Altuve
Bregman
Alvarez
O’Neil
Diaz
Anthony
Mouncastle
Pena
Crawford
Key Bench - Dubon, Dezenzo, Whitcomb, Melton, Janek (at some point)
2025 Starting Rotation -
Brown
Blanco
Verlander or Garcia
Garcia or Verlander
Spaghetti
At some point these pitchers will get starts and may get a permanent spot - Painter or Abel , France and Sandlin
2026 Starting Rotation - 6 man rotation
Brown
Javier
Painter or Abel
Blanco
Garcia
Spaghetti
*Sandlin could also fit in
|
|
|
|
Post by m240 on Nov 30, 2024 9:14:39 GMT -6
Any thoughts to signing Tyler O’Neil to a 3 year/$50M deal? That would help trading away Tucker and getting a top haul for him. Plus could lead to trading away Valdez as well Tucker to Phillies for Painter or Abel + Crawford - To get Future Ace + Top OF prospect Valdez + McCormick or Meyers to Red Sox for Roman Anthony + David Sandlin - To get another top OF prospect + Backend Starter Package of Pressly + Meyers or McCormick + Prospects that can be traded (Leon) Away to the Orioles for Mountcastle anf Mullins - To get a 2 year option at 1B and 2025 LH OF. Sign Tommy Kahlne - Reliever 2 year deal Sign Verlander - 1 year $12.5 M deal + incentives/2nd year team option Re-sign Bregman- 5 or 6 year deal 2025 Altuve Bregman Alvarez O’Neil Mullins or Diaz Diaz or Mullins Mountcastle Pena Anthony Key Bench - Dubon, Caratini, Singleton, Whitcomb, Dezenzo, Crawford (at some point), 2026 Altuve Bregman Alvarez O’Neil Diaz Anthony Mouncastle Pena Crawford Key Bench - Dubon, Dezenzo, Whitcomb, Melton, Janek (at some point) 2025 Starting Rotation - Brown Blanco Verlander or Garcia Garcia or Verlander Spaghetti At some point these pitchers will get starts and may get a permanent spot - Painter or Abel , France and Sandlin 2026 Starting Rotation - 6 man rotation Brown Javier Painter or Abel Blanco Garcia Spaghetti *Sandlin could also fit in My opinion is that we to trade Valdez and Tucker. Your proposals seem realistic to me. In the past I would always do a deep dive into trade proposals to determine what the net impact could be expected. Don't have the time these days. |
|
|
|
Post by thomasj13 on Nov 30, 2024 12:11:29 GMT -6
Any thoughts to signing Tyler O’Neil to a 3 year/$50M deal? That would help trading away Tucker and getting a top haul for him. Plus could lead to trading away Valdez as well Tucker to Phillies for Painter or Abel + Crawford - To get Future Ace + Top OF prospect Valdez + McCormick or Meyers to Red Sox for Roman Anthony + David Sandlin - To get another top OF prospect + Backend Starter Package of Pressly + Meyers or McCormick + Prospects that can be traded (Leon) Away to the Orioles for Mountcastle anf Mullins - To get a 2 year option at 1B and 2025 LH OF. Sign Tommy Kahlne - Reliever 2 year deal Sign Verlander - 1 year $12.5 M deal + incentives/2nd year team option Re-sign Bregman- 5 or 6 year deal 2025 Altuve Bregman Alvarez O’Neil Mullins or Diaz Diaz or Mullins Mountcastle Pena Anthony Key Bench - Dubon, Caratini, Singleton, Whitcomb, Dezenzo, Crawford (at some point), 2026 Altuve Bregman Alvarez O’Neil Diaz Anthony Mouncastle Pena Crawford Key Bench - Dubon, Dezenzo, Whitcomb, Melton, Janek (at some point) 2025 Starting Rotation - Brown Blanco Verlander or Garcia Garcia or Verlander Spaghetti At some point these pitchers will get starts and may get a permanent spot - Painter or Abel , France and Sandlin 2026 Starting Rotation - 6 man rotation Brown Javier Painter or Abel Blanco Garcia Spaghetti *Sandlin could also fit in My opinion is that we to trade Valdez and Tucker. Your proposals seem realistic to me. In the past I would always do a deep dive into trade proposals to determine what the net impact could be expected. Don't have the time these days. I just know I’m gonna be very butthurt in 2026, When Tucker is playing in a different uniform, And the Astros do not have any 2025 hardware or new, great prospects to make up for it |
|
|
|
Post by m240 on Nov 30, 2024 18:38:22 GMT -6
My opinion is that we to trade Valdez and Tucker. Your proposals seem realistic to me. In the past I would always do a deep dive into trade proposals to determine what the net impact could be expected. Don't have the time these days. I just know I’m gonna be very butthurt in 2026, When Tucker is playing in a different uniform, And the Astros do not have any 2025 hardware or new, great prospects to make up for it Valdez too. |
|
|
|
Post by Ashitaka on Nov 30, 2024 19:53:12 GMT -6
Possible bargain guy: Mike Tauchman was non-tendered by the Cubs. No flashy tools but he's a decent defender and can even play CF a bit, draws a lot of walks, doesn't strike out much, and could give you double digit homers in a full season. He's left-handed but actually hits LHP almost as well as he does righties. Could be a nice piece to short up the OF question marks even if Tucker stays and shouldn't cost an arm and a leg.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ashitaka on Dec 1, 2024 0:03:48 GMT -6
MLBTR pointed out that Kyle Finnegan was non-tendered. He was Washington's closer and an All-Star this past season, but due to the likelihood of him getting $8 million or more in arbitration, they cut him lose. If they were to deal Pressly, he could be a nice piece to bring in as a setup man. He's always been pretty good and has good stuff, a little Astros magic could perhaps take him to the next level.
|
|
|
|
Post by thomasj13 on Dec 1, 2024 4:29:36 GMT -6
Ash,
Would you be for or against Astros signing Tyler O’Neil to a 3 year/$50M contract? Or 2 year/$40M?
|
|
