moonslav59

Promotions: https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2019/09/red-sox-announce-baseball-operations-promotions.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook

i wonder how Cora feels about Tito.

Try to win, but just play any and every borderline player. (I said this weeks ago.)

I doubt Houston pays Cole, so I agree, Porcello and maybe another similar pitcher may sign there.

If we are to trade any salary, it makes sense to trade JD, non tender JBJ and look for any FA deals that are low risk or can add a piece that can be part of the extended future or just cheap bridge pieces to the next window.

Yes, 8,000 horrible and another 2,000 just plain bad. Breaking Bad was their only redeeming value.

WOW! He's the best.

Netflix is bad... real bad. 10,000 bad movies. It's like the Hallmark Channel movies on steroids.

I do mind. I hate the cheating Pats!

No, I don't think it is at all, and I wonder why we can't get (more?) people into our system that can do the same.

Yes, you are right. I was thinking more of those who earner their way into the top 1% vs those who were born into it. My bad.

The Astros know how to bring in a guy and show him how to concentrate on what they do best. They are like the Rays: players have career years after being traded to them.

Are those guys 1%'ers? I think not.

They have a very solid OF, so I'm not sure it's a good fit.

Most of the insanely wealthy are insanely intelligent, at least in some area(s). (Note: Trump is a pretender 1%'er.)

I figured that's what you meant, but I wanted to highlight my support for Henry. He's the best thing that ever happened to the Sox. There is no close second place.

I wasn't trying to imply Henry is a bad guy, but I do know he'll walk away with a heck of a lot more money then Mookie, when all is said and done.

I didn't say I wanted to make the trade. I was just speculating on what the cost might be. Plus, I am willing to trade prospects, if it is for young, cost-controlled players with many years of control.

Mookie is the one stuffing Henry's pockets with boatloads of cash while also driving the team's value up by tens of millions.

Yes, like that poster who pounced on Betts for wanting the most he can get. You are so right!

I know. I was thinking teh same thing. Had he concentrated on his choiceds of spending, he might have had a better point.

I could see including Casas and maybe Duran & Chatham but not Devers.

I say that all the time, but don't confuse that with siding with the owners. I'm just being realistic. The system is designed to allow the owners to make much more than the players, even the highest paid ones. It is what it is, and until Henry shows he doesn't care about a budget, I'm going to assume he does and post accordingly. I'm always on the worker's & player's side.

There's no way the CWS would take my offer. Betts and JD might be gone in 1 year, and they are not going for a 1 year window. My offer was in jest.

Here's something on Theo... MLBTR By Dylan A. Chase | September 21, 2019 at 6:20pm CDT With recently returned Cubs closer Craig Kimbrel having issued another ninth-inning meltdown today–against the NL Central-leading Cardinals, no less–Chicago fans may feel disinclined to read today’s piece from Chicago Sun-Times scribe Gordon Wittenmeyer, which doesn’t pull any punches in evaluating the job done by team president Theo Epstein and his staff this year. In Wittenmeyer’s view, blame for the Cubs 2019 underachievement should be directed at ownership and Epstein’s front office–not underperforming players or maligned manager Joe Maddon. Wittenmeyer writes: “What’s clear is that the onus of this season’s shortcomings falls on the shoulders of Theo Epstein’s front office for free agency and player development failings and Ricketts ownership for failure to exercise the market advantage of franchise-record revenues to increase spending during a seize-the-moment competitive window.” Wittenmeyer leaves little earth unscorched in this column, citing the club’s inability to develop impact pitching, unwillingness to spend beyond ownership-established thresholds, and in-house pressure regarding the need for early-season “urgency” as factors that dragged down this year’s Cubbies.