Hugh2

Does anyone here really think we can elevate this club to something better than it's been the past several years by signing the same guys? Yeah, Pivetta is reliably a BOTRS and we got a pletora of those. We don't need Pivetta, we need someone who can raise the ceiling of the rotation. And you know, I don't really want to say this because if it were true you'd think you would of seen a dominant performance but Pivetta is an enigma. From a pure stuff perspective, he's really good.....he should be better than his numbers suggest he is.

Nah man, I call ******** on that I'm sorry. Kluber was 37. Father time beats us all, every single one of us. Most baseball players are either retired or a mirror image of their younger self at 37. Banking on a 30 year old to put up average career numbers is an entirely different thing than saying a 37 year old can. You're at that age where you're either IN SERIOUS DECLINE.....or any year you're going to fall off a cliff. Kluber ran off that cliff full throttle!!!! Kluber hit the wall that year, it's blatantly obvious he hit that wall. Buehler can be a lot of things, for better or worse, but this is not even CLOSE to being a comparison. Buehler ain't up against the wall. He's either back or he aint'. Sometimes guys need time to get back, and if that is him.....pulling it together at the end of the year and looking stronger as the season goes on is EXACTLY what you would expect. I could be wrong, Buehler could be an awful investment. I can admit that, I actually have no problem admitting that and for the official record he is not my first choice (I continue to want Burnes) but Kluber is an awful comparison, there's none to be had between the two really. Sorry.

Yeah, what are you risking? 1-2 years? That's the type of risk you think REAL hard before making when you're the Pittsburgh pirates not the Boston Red Sox.

I really really think we shouldn't give up a pick for 32 year old Sean Manaea

Yeah the Kluber comp is really lazy and unjustified. Buehler is even younger than Paxton was when he pitched here, by about 4 years. The dude is probably going to only play here one year. I'm ok with spreading risk, we already traded away 2 of our top prospects for a pitcher, it really makes sense to spend money on someone, if they're trying to go pitcher and have money left over to sign a hitter someone like Buehler really makes sense. Unless they wanna go big and sign Burnes I don't really see a better move. With the lone caveat being to empty the farm.

Yes it is, but he's already back. It's not like he didn't make it back to pitching. Guys who don't recover from their second Tommy Johns don't find their way back to the majors with good velocity and pitching 75 innings. His stuff also worked its' way back by playoff time as well. That's also a big deal.

I forgot he did come back last year and he looked good......for 10 innings. It's always 10 innings with these guys.

How does one measure performance though? Buehlers velocity returned, and so did his spin rate by the time the playoffs came around. That would suggest the only thing stopping him from becoming an ACE again would be another injury. I'd be willing to bet if less guys recover from their 2nd they don't even come back a lot of the time. I'd also be willing to bet guys who don't succeed coming back from their 2nd and 1st don't see a return of velocity and other metrics. Odds are well that his elbow is fine for at least another 4-5 years. Now his shoulder and other injuries? who knows.

We will also find out soon how Jacob DeGrom fairs.

Is he different than any other guy that's had Tommy John other than he's had two? Nate Eovaldi seemed to recover from his second one just fine. 80-90% of people return to full performance.

Priester is a project. Buehler is a guy who if healthy is maybe just a tweak away from being an ACE again. Paxton also didn't have the luxury of pitching in 2022. Buehler already has that recovery year underneath his belt.

Yankees are old, they get too caught up tradition. Kind of nice to see them lose out that way.

One could argue that now. I wouldn't hate Buehler or Flaherty.....but Burnes is at the top of my Christmas Wish list. Burnes/Crochet/Houck/Giolito/Bello just screams playoffs.

Yeah.....I think the money is what did it. Any deal was bound to have opt outs, I would have been fine with 5 years of Soto and the Luxury Suite is whatever. That's great for the Mets. They have the power to walk away from that when Soto turns 30. And if he still looks like a HOF talent and $80 million is the new $50 million they just might exercise that option.

When a guy takes lesser money, it's usually with the caveat that he was actually getting the same AAV with one less year to move closer to home, or it was a year less but higher AAV. When it's not all about the money.....the money is very very very close.

Unfortunately Crochet may be enough to save off the fan base, and while that was a very very very nice addition.....the team needs to do more.

He very well may have for $765 million

Or maybe John Henry the Fenway Grinch grows some balls and actually wins a bid for a premium player

Agreed, my inner desires are a big name pitcher to augment with Crochet at the top of the rotation.

Yes, but they are in some trouble and are effectively being forced to spend money. Maybe we can convince them to take on Yoshida or Giolito. I'd imagine they might be having trouble attracting talent.

WE GOT SOTO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I don't believe this at all, sounds ridiculous but I'd imagine the argument is we trade for him now because we can extend him. Because somehow we wouldn't be willing to win a bid on him but yet somehow he's going to sign a lesser extension to stay here. But yeah.....wait a year and sign him.

I'd rather trade Casas for pitching (not that I want to trade him) and just sign Vladdy next offseason.

Lets say the Mets and Yankees never increased their last offers and Soto decided he wanted to play in Boston for $700 million? what do you guys think would have happened? I think he would have signed in Boston for $700 million.

Healthy disagreement alone certainly isn't a bad thing, but I'm a little troubled that this was made public.