southsider2k5

Because it means Reynaldo Lopez is getting 15 to 20 starts this year.

Yet, we are going to pencil in Burnes for whole seasons?

How much should schools be responsible for, and when do we start paying teachers to be experts in them?

He made too much sense.

I am so old I remember when he was going to 4/80

Take an Ex Lax, that should fix it.

There it is.

I will have two of what he is having.

That would be absolutely terrible.

Nah, he is good for 180, at least.

One of these thing is true, the other is false. Also, he doesn't have sources.

[insert manager joke here]

If that was the deal, a team would have had Burnes months ago.

So is nothing happening in talks now?

Is his name Ron?

So then how much do you project him to be able to do, and how do you fill what he is unable to give you, especially when you are probably dealing the guys who could fill those innings.

You are going to assume he did at a level worth cleaning out a lot of prospect capital. What you call weird, I call judicious.

They did in 2018 and 2019. In neither year was Burnes among them. And if we are talking about starters to pay a lot for, I would rather it be 180 to 200 innings we were talking about. Instead we are talking about half of that.

I get that, but I also get that some guys aren't made to be 30 start guys.

I'd rather not catch the next Todd Ritchie where we try to project someone isn't ready to make a leap.

Someone convince me how it is worth it to back up the truck for a guy who hasn't pitched over 100 IP in a season since his 2017 A+/AA season.

It sounds great in principal, but those are things they should be getting at home.

And this is why women wait years, if ever, to say anything