Same. Even if it means Matt Kemp manning LF in a wheelchair.Originally Posted by M2
Same. Even if it means Matt Kemp manning LF in a wheelchair.
There's a lot of offseason left, but right now the team has (1) replaced Harvey with Roark, (2) let Billy Hamilton walk, and (3) been in a lot of rumors. There is still a massive amount of work to be done.
Kingspoint (12-19-2018)
Nah. Flip Kemp (and some cash?) to the Orioles for Alex Cobb.
Castillo
Wood
Cobb
Roark
Disco/Mahle/Reed/et al
Our planet is a lonely speck in the great enveloping cosmic dark. In our obscurity, in all this vastness, there is no hint that help will come from elsewhere to save us from ourselves. -- Carl Sagan (Pale Blue Dot)
Nah, they can afford to eat Kemp's deal and be scot-free of both Homer and Kemp by 2020. Plus Wood-Cobb-Roark is a little too much vanilla for me.
In a division where we are the cellar dweller, we’ve done the least. It’s a joke
Nobody is getting upset about not having something to show for Harvey. It's the inaction of the FO along with the unspoken idea that keeping Harvey was a move that was made as a precursor to a likely contract with the Reds in FA.
I don't give them much flak about Cozart because the SS market was terrible that year but they could've moved Harvey for something.
Revering4Blue (12-20-2018),Tom Servo (12-19-2018)
Agreed it needs to happened, and I think it will.
And I don’t think Kemp is useless at this point in his career if he’s used correctly.
Too lit to play in Cincy.
Arise and walk, come through. A world beyond that door is calling out for you. Arise and walk, come through. It's calling out for you.
Exactly!
"One problem with people who have no vices is that they're pretty sure to have some annoying virtues."
I would like it if it did, but I don't see it.
-- Bailey has no-trade rights...not sure why he would waive them.
-- Kemp and especially Wood are still useful players. They Dodgers could dump them to some team without having to deal with Bailey's contract.
I've long been of the view the Reds need to good at vanilla. Get the innings eaten, give the offense a chance to win.
I'm not a system player. I am a system.
*BaseClogger* (12-19-2018),Revering4Blue (12-20-2018)
It sounds like the Dodgers only need to make the trade if they’re getting Harper, which could still happen.
I don’t really get that though, to me those two things are pretty inseparable. What’s the point in being mad about their inaction if they weren’t going to get much of anything for him in the first place?
Maybe the decision to not bring Harvey back wasn't made until Roark was acquired.
Was it inaction? A sign of goodwill towards him signing back? Or was it that the offers were so underwhelming to them that they made the calculation that the innings he gave them from the deadline on were worth more than the trade return they were offered? I believe that something is better than nothing, but if their reason for not dealing him was the latter, I understand it.
OGB (12-19-2018)
Posting Permissions
|
Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please. |
Reply With Quote