WestEddy

Every post-season has a couple of teams that are stacked. Padres, Dodgers, Yankees, Red Sox, Rangers, Phillies, Braves, Mets. Then you have the teams that put together a nice core, and coast for most of a decade - Astros, Cubs, Orioles, Guards, Nats, Brewers, Cardinals, Giants, D-backs, Twins, D-Rays Goodness, look. I've just rattled off about 2/3 of baseball. Then you get the weirdo teams that shoot up for a couple of years. Royals, tigers, White Sox, Blue Jays, A's. If that last bunch would just run their businesses better, you have 80% of baseball that are at least semi-competitive for most of the time. The Dodgers grind down their pitchers to a nub. That's why they need a rotation of 10 guys. You don't have to root for injuries. They're just going to happen. On top of it, guys like Betts, Freeman, Muncy - they're all on the wrong side of 30, and in a few years, they're going to be paying league average performers $30+M. Dynasties happen. It was fun pretending the Astros were the evil empire because they cheated. Or the Yankees. Or the Red Sox for their insufferable fans.

With the way the Dodgers chew through pitchers, Kopech will start 6 games, get his next TJS, and they'll be trading for Martin Perez.

Yeah, there was a time when it got tiresome watching the Cowboys and 49ers go to the Super Bowl regularly. Richard Dent even signed with the 49ers to win a ring. Teams built to win over a period of time isn't "bad" for their sport.

B-R pitchers' WAR explained. https://www.baseball-reference.com/about/war_explained_pitch.shtml

Blue Jay players are paid in US$

I think he could have signed in the previous period, but that would have greatly truncated his time to evaluate suitors.

He has to be signed to a minor league deal, which I believe is fairly bare-bones. If MLB catches wind of any side deals that escalate his salary, they could void his contract, make him a free agent, and sanction the Blue Jays.

I would guess no.

More people to cut....

Uecker's HOF speech https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h7dG5HCKeWA

Euker on Carson, early 70's. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHFClLGqz8w

So why do you complain about individual moves? Canaan Smith-Njigba, Michael A. Taylor, Joey Bart, all of them would have been pathetic moves, in your eyes. and even if every Tim Hill worked out, you'd still fall back on "nothing will change until Reinsdorf dies". If you can't admit that Perez would have been a better backup catcher than Maldonado, then you're just trolling.

Nobody's calling it a good move. It was a bad signing. In the grand scheme of things (neutralizing the negative voices in the clubhouse for a weak manager), I can understand why Getz brought him in. It would have made more sense to bring in Salvatore Perez, but he would have hurt too many SoxTalk feelings.

Amazing misreading of the sitch.

I'm not defending the move. I didn't like it when it happened. I can understand the logic behind it, therefore, I don't need to scream myself hoarse damning it. Getz didn't sign Maldonado because he thought he was getting a 10 WAR catcher at a discount. I don't think it takes a stretch of the imagination to understand that Grifol wanted Maldonado to help control the clubhouse, and Getz, who wanted to fire Grifol anyway, was happy to grant him that sop.

Fair enough. Most of his moves blew up in his face. Bad luck.

No, actually, it's the pickup of Canaan Smith-Njigba.

You call out every move as stupid, regardless of whether it's widely panned or not.

Tell that to WS2023, who thinks that signing players is like walking to the drug store and paying the cashier, irrespective of what the player wants, what makes sense with one's team's stage in a rebuild, and logical reality.

Caulfield, what on Earth are you talking about? I really wish they would have shipped out half of these guys before the end of their careers, or before they sunk our team.

I didn't like it, either. Just because a baseball team makes a move I don't like doesn't mean I have to cease to live my life in reality, and pretend everything going forward fits some goofball, conspiracy framing.

For years after my brother died, my wife would remind me that I was angry and acting like a jerk days before the anniversary of his death. I can understand that the whole month of January is probably like that for you. You are in my thoughts.

The "majority" of posters (meaning, the people you pay attention to) also twist themselves into pretzels to pretend good moves are bad, and that every player not picked off of waivers was surely a 4-WAR player who would have brought back a "haul" in return at the TDL. A $4M contract isn't a lot of money. Weird that Austin Hays still hasn't signed. Maybe the rest of baseball has the same concerns Chris Getz had/has. I like to defend logical thinking. We know why Maldonado was signed. We don't have to pretend that Chris Getz was so dumb, he thought he just signed a 10-WAR catcher. EDIT: And I'm sure if you read through, you'll see me saying I didn't like the signing, either. They could have done that all with somebody who would have been productive. The only way it makes sense was that Maldonado was a "veteran" presence, and Grifol wanted him. And by "makes sense", I don't mean, "I love this move, gimme more!!!" I mean that I can understand the thinking behind it, even while disagreeing.

No you don't. You might as well find a flaw in Charles Comiskey's management skills, then apply them to Reinsdorf. The crazy thing is that some of the people you mention as only "leadership" were already under contract. Teams expect vets to exude "leadership". If that's a problem for you, then maybe you have a problem with all of sports.

I don't think it's a stretch of the imagination to assume Grifol wanted Maldonado to help keep control of the clubhouse. Could they have had him cheaper? I guess. That's the guy asking why we care about saving Reinsdorf money, then complains about every contract.