Balta1701

Assuming no Yolmer, that’s about right give or take.

With like 150 pitches in a game by the Nats, if putting down a series of signs takes a few extra seconds, that’s a nontrivial increase in the length of each game.

Given that he's likely not the only QO player we'll sign, I'd have signed him for that.

Is it really? This is a pretty big claim with no evidence provided. How do you assess that? Most MLB players who get to 3 WAR start off near 0, so that seems fairly common. Very few become 5 WAR players.

This concept reminds me of the Mark Teahen trade. Convince yourself a guy is better than he is, trade for him, extend him based on how good you've decided he is.

If they got to keep the money...they wouldn't be. That money is not tied to Greinke, they could keep it.

Effectively they would be turning those 2 good prospects into the last 2 months of Greinke and the extra $20 million they got from the D-Backs, to allow them to sign Cole/Wheeler while still staying under the tax line (they'd probably have to move Reddick also but again, do-able). Turning those 2 prospects into 2 months of a pitcher to make a run at the series and $20 million for the next 2 years, not a bad move on paper.

It sounds like he's still unhappy about being left off their postseason roster, which is probably a fair point. That's one obvious problem with trying a setup like that; you have to make decisions in baseball that won't leave everyone on your roster totally happy, and as a consequence eventually everyone's gonna know.

IMO he's clearly holding a grudge and wanted this to be a big deal.

Indiana Football is ranked in the top 25 of the AP and Coaches Polls. I believe this is a strong indication of "yes".

If the Astros gave Greinke away for virtually no prospect return, would you take on his full remaining contract and leave the Astros with the money coming from Arizona? I might.

Wouldn't Object To ≠ would be good at.

But you're only considering 1 season in the case you just gave, and yet the guys being signed are for 3 or 4 year deals. So yes, guys are coming back from injury and young...but you also don't want to lock up that much money on 2 starters for multiple years when you do have that many guys who can take the ball. So yeah, my setup may not be as good as yours next year (bring in stras and there's a good chance that it is), but my setup is playing the long game.

While it's a limitation, if your organization is insistent that you're keeping Abreu around, then yes you have to plan for your DH position to be filled by a 1 year guy this year, or at least have some flexibility to move your DH to other positions. I kinda like Moustakas for the second reason; throw him a 1b glove this year, tell him to learn that position and become a true utility guy by next year, give him a 2 year deal and he covers 3b, 2b, 1b, and maybe you could talk him into a corner OF spot, along with DH, and he also fits in by giving some LH balance. There's 500+ PAs available in year 2 for him if we can do that with him.

He's a guy who should have put in calls this week to teams. If he doesn't have anything close to that kind of money on the table then he should accept it, and his agent should have been telling teams that if they didn't put solid offers on the table he'd just take the QO.