Baseball 2016 (2 Viewers)

Yes, but this is basically a 500 team, give or take a couple of games. They have some valuable chips and Cashman can get teams like the Nats and Cubs to drive up the price. The Yankees have some good young players and if they can add some future prospects to go along with them and add a pitcher or two in 2017 and maybe Harper a year later (or whenever he becomes available), they could be in good shape in the years to come. They need to restock now.
 
jazzeum said:
Yes, but this is basically a 500 team, give or take a couple of games. They have some valuable chips and Cashman can get teams like the Nats and Cubs to drive up the price. The Yankees have some good young players and if they can add some future prospects to go along with them and add a pitcher or two in 2017 and maybe Harper a year later (or whenever he becomes available), they could be in good shape in the years to come. They need to restock now.
Click to expand...
Rumors all over the place regarding Nats/NYY trade possibilities. Nats want bullpen help and the NYY's have it. Nats have several young players that could be used as trade bait. Also a rumor the Nats could be interested in Gardner for leadoff. Gonna get interesting. -- Al
 
The Yankees seem to be the linchpin of the trading market. Everything will flow from their decision. What could throw the market into chaos is if they continue to win and stand pat or become buyers.
 
Good lord, the O's have turned the NYY starting pitchers into Cy Young award winners all. Shut out by another guy with an ERA over 5. Jeesh.:rolleyes2: -- Al
 
Allegedly, the Cubs are not willing to trade Schwarber for Chapman or Miller. Could be a negotiating tactic.
 
jazzeum said:
Allegedly, the Cubs are not willing to trade Schwarber for Chapman or Miller. Could be a negotiating tactic.
Click to expand...

Yeah, why would you want to trade a guy for either of those lights out closers, probably punching your ticket to the World Series, a place the Cubs haven't been since Christ was in a crib.

Typical Theo Epstein move; he doesn't understand the concept of a trade, which by definition is something that benefits BOTH parties, not just one party fleecing the other..................
 
Chris Tillman beat the NYY's today to run his record to 14-2. Not only is he in the Cy Young race, but he has to be in the MVP race. Considering the rest of the O's starting staff and the fact that the team is only 2 games over .500 without Tillman, an MVP starting pitcher is not totally crazy in this case. -- Al
 
Nats are spinning their wheels since the break. They have a very tough schedule coming up. After 3 in SD, 11 of the next 14 games are against red-hot Cleveland (4 games) and NL West leaders SF (7 games). They better find their game again or those 2 teams could run the Nats over. Nats have been this way all season, play well and look like they are ready to run away and hide, then, BOOM!, they can't hit or find any consistency and they come right back to the pack. The inconsistency is really frustrating. Which team is gonna show?:rolleyes2: -- Al
 
lancer said:
Nats are spinning their wheels since the break. They have a very tough schedule coming up. After 3 in SD, 11 of the next 14 games are against red-hot Cleveland (4 games) and NL West leaders SF (7 games). They better find their game again or those 2 teams could run the Nats over. Nats have been this way all season, play well and look like they are ready to run away and hide, then, BOOM!, they can't hit or find any consistency and they come right back to the pack. The inconsistency is really frustrating. Which team is gonna show?:rolleyes2: -- Al
Click to expand...

Something has to give against the Giants. They have been terrible since the break. I am ok with losing 2 out of 2 to the Sox as Boston is good and it was Peavy and Cain who took the losses. But losing 3 out of 3 to San Diego is unacceptable especially when you consider Bumgarner couldn't even get a win.
 
Panzer ace said:
Something has to give against the Giants. They have been terrible since the break. I am ok with losing 2 out of 2 to the Sox as Boston is good and it was Peavy and Cain who took the losses. But losing 3 out of 3 to San Diego is unacceptable especially when you consider Bumgarner couldn't even get a win.
Click to expand...
Nats have not done well against the NL West. We split with SD the first time, and LA seems to own us. I hope we can do better as we still have 7 games to play against SF, 7 against Arizona, 6 against Colorado, and the 3 this weekend at SD. Nats absolutely have to do better against the west. -- Al
 
Al, you guys are in a good position, four and five games up against the Marlins and Mets, respectively. Yes, it could be better but I wouldn't mind being in that position.

Considering their starting pitching issues (no Harvey, Matz may have to be shut down eventually), I'm not sure how much better the Mets will get. In addition, they have an issue in the outfield because Cespedes doesn't want to pay CF because of the toll on his legs. That complicates the flexibility of getting playing time for Lagares, Conforto and Granderson in the OF. There is also the issue of getting playing time for Flores, who has been hot, but there is not much playing room for him in the IF. They also demoted Nimmo in favor of Conforto when he had clearly provided them a spark. Unfortunately, the manager is not very imaginative and disregarded the spark he provided, so there we are.
 
jazzeum said:
Al, you guys are in a good position, four and five games up against the Marlins and Mets, respectively. Yes, it could be better but I wouldn't mind being in that position.

Considering their starting pitching issues (no Harvey, Matz may have to be shut down eventually), I'm not sure how much better the Mets will get. In addition, they have an issue in the outfield because Cespedes doesn't want to pay CF because of the toll on his legs. That complicates the flexibility of getting playing time for Lagares, Conforto and Granderson in the OF. There is also the issue of getting playing time for Flores, who has been hot, but there is not much playing room for him in the IF. They also demoted Nimmo in favor of Conforto when he had clearly provided them a spark. Unfortunately, the manager is not very imaginative and disregarded the spark he provided, so there we are.
Click to expand...
I agree, better to be ahead than behind, it's just the lack of consistency that annoys me.
What's up with Matz and how is Syndergaard's elbow? The rotation still seems pretty solid even with Harvey out. Don't understand the Cespedes thing. Where does he want to play and what is he saving his legs for? -- Al
 
Matz hasn't been particularly effective for awhile; his health always seems a little suspect. Syndergaard looked good against the Cubs. Following the All Star break, the Mets set up the rotation so those two would have maximum rest.

Cespedes has been having leg problems (and has had to sit out a few games) because of the running he has to do in CF, so they're trying to avoid having him play there.

Did you see that Manfred has been complaining about how good the relievers in baseball are and that, according to them, the closers are ruining the later innnings. It sounds like he somehow wants teams to limit their use and number. I don't know if he was talking off the cuff or had a plan in mind. Hopefully, the former.
 
jazzeum said:
Matz hasn't been particularly effective for awhile; his health always seems a little suspect. Syndergaard looked good against the Cubs. Following the All Star break, the Mets set up the rotation so those two would have maximum rest.

Cespedes has been having leg problems (and has had to sit out a few games) because of the running he has to do in CF, so they're trying to avoid having him play there.

Did you see that Manfred has been complaining about how good the relievers in baseball are and that, according to them, the closers are ruining the later innnings. It sounds like he somehow wants teams to limit their use and number. I don't know if he was talking off the cuff or had a plan in mind. Hopefully, the former.
Click to expand...
Yes, I read what Manfred has said about the relievers. I'm not adverse to restricting the number of relief pitchers used in an inning but I don't see how it's possible to do anything about the closer without changing the basic game as it is played. I mean, someone has to pitch the last inning. Personally, I hate the match-up mentality you see when managers change pitchers for each batter in a given inning. I understand it, but I don't like it and it slows the game up dreadfully. Anyway, I don't see how Manfred can say relievers are ruining the game as they are so important a part of the game and will remain especially so as long as the standard for a starting pitcher remains 6 innings. -- Al
 
lancer said:
Yes, I read what Manfred has said about the relievers. I'm not adverse to restricting the number of relief pitchers used in an inning but I don't see how it's possible to do anything about the closer without changing the basic game as it is played. I mean, someone has to pitch the last inning. Personally, I hate the match-up mentality you see when managers change pitchers for each batter in a given inning. I understand it, but I don't like it and it slows the game up dreadfully. Anyway, I don't see how Manfred can say relievers are ruining the game as they are so important a part of the game and will remain especially so as long as the standard for a starting pitcher remains 6 innings. -- Al
Click to expand...

Considering the highs scores we have seen recently I don't see how you can "limit" the number of relievers. Can you imagine being the guy who is stuck out on the mound throwing pitch after pitch, giving up hit after hit with no end in sight because the manager can't take you out because of some sort of limitation?

There has to be some other way to shorten games.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Community platform by XenForo® © 2010-2024 XenForo Ltd.
Back
Top