moonslav59

I've never been that high on Robertson, and his age scares me now. I think Britton will be too costly. Maybe he'd agree to an inflated one year deal, so he can prove he is still dominant and durable. We could offer a second year option with a hefty buyout. I'd rather go cheaper with Ottavino or Familia and then use the left over money to go towards adding another quality set-up man.

Yes, I should have said that was his Sox WHIP. It might not be Eovaldi vs Porcello, but my guess is that by having a $15M contract on the books next year will be a big factor in deciding to let Porcello or Sale walk without replacing them in kind. I may be wrong, but I'm a firm believer than Henry will demand a re-set of the tax after 2020. (Some feel it might be after 2019.) If that is true, the planning begins now or actually began already, when we haven't sign anybody for long term deals after the Price deal. Moreland, Peacre, Nunez and JD's opt out are all under 3 years.

He's 35 and not likely to continue coming near his previous numbers over the next 5 years. In his defense, he has had 2 seasons over .845 in his last 3 years, but one was just barely near 350 PAs. .803 OPS ages 22-25 .899 OPS ages 26-30 .826 OPS ages 31-35

Porcello turns 30 this month. He has a long history of durability and dependability. At this age and over the next 2-4 years, he is still capable of having his best career year. Eovaldi turns 29 in February. He's about 15 months younger than Porcello. He's had one season with more than 154 innings. He's had 2 TJ surgeries. I'll agree, he has nastier stuff than Porcello, and in that sense, one can logically argue he has higher upside, but even this year, his WHIP was 1.278. It seems to me, that his short playoff brilliance is being looked upon as what we can expect for 190 innings x 4 years. I think that is a big leap of faith. Expecting Porcello to continue being steady Rick deserves more faith. Look, maybe we can keep both (and let Sale go), but somebody will have to go, if we bring back Eovaldi for 3+ years.

Well, they already look like they won't be as good next year. Keuchel, Morton and Marwin Gonzalez are free agents, and they may not replace them in kind. After 2019: Verlander Cole McHugh Pressly 4th arb: Springer 2nd arb: Osuna, Correa & Devenski 1st arb: Bregman It's not like ours, but they are coming up on some serious and costly choices.

Bruce was just a partial financial offset for Cano. The M's saved $64M, so basically, the Mets are paying Cano $13M a year for 5 years at ages 36-40. That's a horrible contract, but getting Diaz offsets some of that. The real balance tilter will be how well the prospects do going forward. (Diaz will start being paid more as well, but will still be below market value cost.)

Then, can't one rightfully argue that by trading away those types of players (like Espi) takes away from the hopes that our farm was on its way back? We were called pessimists for feeling that way. It just seems like you can't have it both ways. I do have some hope in our longer term prospects. I have stated that I feel the impending cliff (or valley) will be short, in part in my belief that some of these prospects might help in 3-6 years. Our major farm issue, right now, is the neat total lack of any meaningful, ML ready impact prospects. We will need some youth infusion after 2019 and 2020. None of these guys will be ready: Rank Age 2. 18 Casas 3. 20 Groome 7. 19 Mata 8. 18 A Flores 11. 19 Decker 13. 19 Howlett 14. 19 D Diaz 18. 10 Northcut 19. 20 A Scherff 20. 18 G Jimenez I certainly like the above list more than this one... 1. Chavis 23 4. D Hernandez 21 (He might be our best hope.) 5. Dalbec 23 (still in AA) 6. Houck 22 (probably pen bound) 9. Chatham 23 (was in A ball this year) 10. Feltman 21 (Maybe can be very helpful soon) 12. Shawaryn 24 (6 slot starter in probably his ceiling.) 15. Lakins 24 (Could be called up this year.) 16. J Duran 22 (was in A ball this year) 17. Ockimey 23 (was not protected for rule 5)

Notre Dame's other wins are way better than Ohio State's. Even though some of these teams are not currently ranked, they were when we beat them or were in the top 25 at some point this year. Yes, Notre Dame beat #7Michigan and #21 N'Western, but we also beat.... Wake Forest by 29 Va Tech by 22 Pittsburgh by 5 FLA St by 29 #20 Syracuse by 33 USC by 7 OK, Vandy & Ball St. were pushovers, but I would argue that ND has beat better teams than Clemson, and could/should be ranked #2. No way does Georgia, Oklahoma or Ohio St. have a claim against ND.

Good one! Stan the man garden gnome!

The Mets -M's deal is done. The M's send just $20M and save $64M. Cano, Diaz & $20M for Bruce, Swarzak, Kelenic, Dunn and Bautista Now, word is out the Mets are looking at Kluber.

They both have great teams and a closing window. I'm not saying or trying to imply Eovaldi is bad, but assuming Eovaldi is going to pitch even 150+ innings in 3 of the 4 years he likely will get on his next deal may be a huge stretch. Without the playoff heroics, I doubt the sense of wanting him back would be any where near what it is now. I'm not saying we should throw out what he did. He showed some big kahunas out there, and teams need guys like him. The love the team showed him after that 18 inning loss brought tears to my eyes (and his & Porcello). It was storybook! My big concern is our budget. I want us to keep Betts, but I think we will re-set the tax in 2020 or 2021. It will be very hard to keep Betts and have a decent team around him as well. Every dollar committed to 2020 and beyond could and likely will squeeze out someone, if not Betts, then maybe Bogey, Sale, Porcello or JBJ...or some other player we want or need. Sure, if Eovaldi gives us 190+ IP'd for 4 years, we may get by without Sale or Porcello or Bogey or Betts, but thinking of just 2019 worries me. Had we not won this year, the sense of urgency on the closing window would probably change my position. Yes, I'd love to win again in 2019, even if it meant we might not be as competitive in 2020 and beyond, but it's a difficult balancing act, and a lot depends on Henry's plans for if and when we re-set the tax. If he's willing to go 4 more years paying mega taxes, I'm all in on Eovaldi... 200%!. I love the guy. I also plan on being around many more years, and want us to be good in 2021 and beyond.

Alabama 54 Oklahoma 31 Notre Dame 26 Clemson 23 Title game: Alabama 27 Notre Dame 29

My projected FBS rankings: 1. Alabama 2. Clemson 3. Notre Dame 4. Oklahoma 5. Ohio State 6. Georgia 7. UCF 8. Michigan 9. Washington 10. Florida

Certainly, our farm is better looking at the lower levels, but all I heard when we traded Espinoza was that you can't count on guys that low in the system. Now, I'm being asked to trust guys that low in the system.

Pittsburg, Memphis twice and #24 Cincy is pretty bad for the best 3 teams played, but other teams lost 1-2 games- some to not great teams. I wouldn't put them in, but I think they belong at #6 or 7.

You are assuming a lot. We can probably extend Porcello at $20-22M a year. He's more reliable, and I'm not buying the more upside argument for Eovaldi. Porcello has Cy Young upsdie- proven. Eovaldi is one of the least proven pitchers looking at $60M/4 I can think of.

Maximizing 2019 might be minimizing 2020 and beyond.

Well, Alabama's comeback made sure ND won't face them in the semi finals. Hard to think Georgia doesn't belong in the 4, but Oklahoma squeaks in again. I can't see Ohio State passing OKL, even if the blow out N'Western. Clemson is up on Pitt right now. UCF won a wild one, but has no chance. Assuming Ohio St and Clemson win, here's my final rankings (not what I think the polls will show): 1. Alabama 2. Notre Dame (Clemson will be #2, if they beat Pitt) 3. Clemson 4. Oklahoma 5. Georgia 6. Ohio State (assuming they win. They will probably be ahead of GA.) 7. UCF 8. Michigan 9. Florida 10. Washington/LSU/Wash St.

He'd probably be less likely to get hurt by just pitching 65-70 innings a year vs 150-200, but $15M a year is a lot for a closer. I'm not sure he wants to close.

Wondering when the first domino will fall.

I'm a huge VTek fan, but I agree. Fisk was on another level.

So true. Some risks have not worked out... many have. To me, DD's best deals have been very low risk ones: The Eovaldi trade. The Pearce trade. The Nunez trade. The Brasier signing.

No. I think there are a few of us that are very hesitant, especially if the deal goes beyond 2-3 years.

Porcello is much less of a risk, even if his cost is more. He's been better and more dependable and durable that Eovaldi. Nathan is a huge risk. There's just no getting around it. Before the playoffs started, I doubt anyone would say we should sign him to $60M/4. Don't get me wrong, I'd love him to come back, but if it's an either/or situation, it's a more complex decision than it seems to be.

Yeh, he should have been enough to lead us to a ring. (LOL)