Author Topic: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread  (Read 77015 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline wpa2629

  • Posts: 16745
  • No Trade Clause
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2700: December 06, 2012, 12:10:14 PM »
LOL

Offline PebbleBall

  • Posts: 2995
  • Now that right there is baseball.
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2701: December 06, 2012, 12:11:08 PM »
I'd avoid using FAP too often on a message board.  :lol:

Urban Dictionary-it if you don't follow.


Believe me, I followed when I wrote it.  I'm sick some of the FAPing on this board.

Offline wpa2629

  • Posts: 16745
  • No Trade Clause
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2702: December 06, 2012, 12:12:59 PM »
Amanda Comak ‏@acomak

Denard Span will have a former teammate in division RT @toddzolecki: Sources: Phillies acquire Ben Revere from Twins. http://zozone.mlblogs.com/2012/12/06/sources-phillies-acquire-revere/

Offline Glockypoo

  • Posts: 743
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2703: December 06, 2012, 12:13:07 PM »
Believe me, I followed when I wrote it.  I'm sick some of the FAPing on this board.

Sorry for underestimating you  8)

Offline hammondsnats

  • Posts: 37363
  • LAC 8)
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2704: December 06, 2012, 12:13:43 PM »
2013 will be their 7th full season, and they will have their 7th consecutive payroll increase per USA Today.

I'm not a LAC/LANC regular, so I don't care.  But for me, LAC is dead and they don't have to become plaid-jacket Steinbrenner to prove it.  I'm going with FAP, Fans Aren't Patient.

7th consecutive payroll increase?  they started at 30s?  i'd like to think they'd go up a lot (instead they went up little by little).

Offline hammondsnats

  • Posts: 37363
  • LAC 8)
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2705: December 06, 2012, 12:14:26 PM »
Amanda Comak ‏@acomak

Denard Span will have a former teammate in division RT @toddzolecki: Sources: Phillies acquire Ben Revere from Twins. http://zozone.mlblogs.com/2012/12/06/sources-phillies-acquire-revere/


interesting ... didn't see that one coming.  i'd rather have span though.

Offline hammondsnats

  • Posts: 37363
  • LAC 8)
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2706: December 06, 2012, 12:14:48 PM »
So then your position is that they used to be cheap but no longer are?    :shrug:

incorrect

Offline wpa2629

  • Posts: 16745
  • No Trade Clause
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2707: December 06, 2012, 12:15:34 PM »
incorrect

OMG

Please find a new drum to bang - please please please pretty please

Offline houston-nat

  • Posts: 16709
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2708: December 06, 2012, 12:16:25 PM »
Amanda Comak ‏@acomak

Denard Span will have a former teammate in division RT @toddzolecki: Sources: Phillies acquire Ben Revere from Twins. http://zozone.mlblogs.com/2012/12/06/sources-phillies-acquire-revere/
The Twins traded Span AND Revere? That's bizarre.

Offline Jordanz Meatballz

  • Posts: 4594
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2709: December 06, 2012, 12:16:47 PM »
Who did the Phillies trade for Revere?  I thought they didn't have prospects.

Offline wpa2629

  • Posts: 16745
  • No Trade Clause
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2710: December 06, 2012, 12:17:10 PM »
The Twins traded Span AND Revere? That's bizarre.

Something's going on over there ... who's next? Mauer?

Offline tomterp

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 28416
  • Hell yes!
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2711: December 06, 2012, 12:18:21 PM »
incorrect

Then you need to clarify your position.  You said they were cheap in the past but you've yet to comment directly on the $115m projected salary for 2013.  Why not take a stand?    :shrug:

Offline hammondsnats

  • Posts: 37363
  • LAC 8)
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2712: December 06, 2012, 12:19:58 PM »
OMG

Please find a new drum to bang - please please please pretty please

oh yeah i'm the only one talking about it :crazy:

Offline hammondsnats

  • Posts: 37363
  • LAC 8)
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2713: December 06, 2012, 12:21:20 PM »
Then you need to clarify your position.  You said they were cheap in the past but you've yet to comment directly on the $115m projected salary for 2013.  Why not take a stand?    :shrug:

have they improved?  yes.

still not there yet though.  could've given burnett $8 million. 

and while we're at it, could've signed greinke AND hamilton and traded for upton and signed sanchez for depth 8)

Offline houston-nat

  • Posts: 16709
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2714: December 06, 2012, 12:22:06 PM »
Looks like the Phillies traded a pitching prospect for Ben Revere... AND they also traded Vance Worley.

So the Phillies pretty much doubled what we gave them for Span.

Offline Glockypoo

  • Posts: 743
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2715: December 06, 2012, 12:24:41 PM »
have they improved?  yes.

still not there yet though.  could've given burnett $8 million. 


I honestly believe it was simply a case of Rizzo not wanting Burnett for any price.


Offline hammondsnats

  • Posts: 37363
  • LAC 8)
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2716: December 06, 2012, 12:26:48 PM »
I honestly believe it was simply a case of Rizzo not wanting Burnett for any price.

fair enough. 

Offline PebbleBall

  • Posts: 2995
  • Now that right there is baseball.
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2717: December 06, 2012, 12:29:11 PM »
have they improved?  yes.

still not there yet though.  could've given burnett $8 million. 

and while we're at it, could've signed greinke AND hamilton and traded for upton and signed sanchez for depth 8)

The thing is, without rehashing every old argument, as of today the Nationals can be considered one of the top competitors for 2013 and are in great financial shape for the future.  A big part of that is making the decisions on moves like these that look fine in a vacuum. 

Online Slateman

  • Posts: 25857
  • Home of the $400 blender
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2718: December 06, 2012, 12:43:51 PM »
Who did the Phillies trade for Revere?  I thought they didn't have prospects.
A number 4/5 starter and a prospect. So, basically, we could have had him if we had traded John Lannan and Alex Meyer.

Offline Hondo

  • Posts: 622
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2719: December 06, 2012, 12:52:32 PM »
Trevor May is the prospect.  His AA stats were not great, but MLB.com has him ranked as the Phillies 2nd best prospect.

Offline Tyler Durden

  • Posts: 7971
  • Leprechaun
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2720: December 06, 2012, 12:55:50 PM »
What kind of LHP would Bernadina or Corey Brown net?  Would Corey Brown start for the Astros?

Offline hammondsnats

  • Posts: 37363
  • LAC 8)
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2721: December 06, 2012, 01:07:14 PM »
What kind of LHP would Bernadina or Corey Brown net?  Would Corey Brown start for the Astros?

i'd be happy to get rid of both haha.

Online Slateman

  • Posts: 25857
  • Home of the $400 blender
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2722: December 06, 2012, 01:16:23 PM »
What kind of LHP would Bernadina or Corey Brown net?  Would Corey Brown start for the Astros?

Nothing.

Brown is too old. The Astros want to go young. They're looking at adding talent in the Double A and below area. Destin Hood might be worthwhile for them. Brown would be more useful for a team looking for a fourth outfielder now.

Offline chemist

  • Posts: 1099
  • Cheering All Zimmermen
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2723: December 06, 2012, 01:35:31 PM »
Bleh, I'm not a big Mike Gonzalez fan. I don't have the stats to back it up at the moment. I hope he's not the bullpen lefty solution Rizzo has in mind

Offline GNatsNoMore

  • Posts: 608
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2724: December 06, 2012, 01:49:18 PM »
The thing is, without rehashing every old argument, as of today the Nationals can be considered one of the top competitors for 2013 and are in great financial shape for the future.  A big part of that is making the decisions on moves like these that look fine in a vacuum. 


Apparently, we're the lone favorite to win the World Series in 2013, at least according to a bookmaker named Bovada cited by Kilgore:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/nationals/nationals-wrap-up-their-winter-meetings-early/2012/12/05/8c9fe8ec-3f3f-11e2-bca3-aadc9b7e29c5_story.html

How fast things can change!