Author Topic: 2017-2018 Off-season Discussion Thread  (Read 8314 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline whytev

  • Posts: 8768
Re: 2017-2018 Off-season Discussion Thread
« Reply #175: November 02, 2017, 06:38:12 PM »
The Nationals declined Lind.

What the freak is wrong with these people?

Offline Mattionals

  • Posts: 4027
Re: 2017-2018 Off-season Discussion Thread
« Reply #176: November 02, 2017, 07:44:38 PM »
This link is nice in that it lists the top 50 free agents. Along with their predictions of landing spots for what that is worth.

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2017/11/2017-18-top-50-mlb-free-agents-with-predictions.html

I love these lists. They never make sense because they seem to never think what a team has for budget, what the team is losing, what the team has in their minors, or any ACTUAL thinking.

For instance, the Red Sox and Giants are expected to be paying a ton if you were to tally up all the players that this list picks to go there. The Nats? Brandon Kintzler. That's it. No other relievers in the top 50 other than Kintzler. One starter, a few relievers, and some bench pieces are what are expected to be brought on. Not all of those need to be top 50, but just one guy? That is just dumb.

Offline Slateman

  • Posts: 41591
Re: 2017-2018 Off-season Discussion Thread
« Reply #177: November 02, 2017, 07:50:16 PM »
I love these lists. They never make sense because they seem to never think what a team has for budget, what the team is losing, what the team has in their minors, or any ACTUAL thinking.

For instance, the Red Sox and Giants are expected to be paying a ton if you were to tally up all the players that this list picks to go there. The Nats? Brandon Kintzler. That's it. No other relievers in the top 50 other than Kintzler. One starter, a few relievers, and some bench pieces are what are expected to be brought on. Not all of those need to be top 50, but just one guy? That is just dumb.

The Nats are already at the limits of their payroll. The Nats also have a very complete team, on paper.

Offline Mattionals

  • Posts: 4027
Re: 2017-2018 Off-season Discussion Thread
« Reply #178: November 02, 2017, 08:15:17 PM »
The Nats are already at the limits of their payroll. The Nats also have a very complete team, on paper.

According to Cots, assuming 24 Million in arbitration, nearly 7.5 Million in pre-arb players, 2.25 Million in 40-man players, 13.5 Million in player benefits (calaculated for Tax purposed and part of the Collective Bargaining Tax threshold) the Nats are at 193.3 Million (approximately). That could be lower depending on what Rendon, Roark, and Taylor all make in arbitration.

Offline Slateman

  • Posts: 41591
Re: 2017-2018 Off-season Discussion Thread
« Reply #179: November 02, 2017, 08:22:47 PM »
According to Cots, assuming 24 Million in arbitration, nearly 7.5 Million in pre-arb players, 2.25 Million in 40-man players, 13.5 Million in player benefits (calaculated for Tax purposed and part of the Collective Bargaining Tax threshold) the Nats are at 193.3 Million (approximately). That could be lower depending on what Rendon, Roark, and Taylor all make in arbitration.
And the luxury tax is 197 million.

Like I said, pretty much at the payro threshold and I don't see Rizzo spending the remainder on Kintzler.

Offline Natsinpwc

  • Posts: 9782
Re: 2017-2018 Off-season Discussion Thread
« Reply #180: November 02, 2017, 08:58:58 PM »
I love these lists. They never make sense because they seem to never think what a team has for budget, what the team is losing, what the team has in their minors, or any ACTUAL thinking.

For instance, the Red Sox and Giants are expected to be paying a ton if you were to tally up all the players that this list picks to go there. The Nats? Brandon Kintzler. That's it. No other relievers in the top 50 other than Kintzler. One starter, a few relievers, and some bench pieces are what are expected to be brought on. Not all of those need to be top 50, but just one guy? That is just dumb.
I would not pay attention to where the list says they will go.  Just posted for the list and discussion.

Offline Natsinpwc

  • Posts: 9782
Re: 2017-2018 Off-season Discussion Thread
« Reply #181: November 02, 2017, 09:00:22 PM »
The Nationals declined Lind.

What the freak is wrong with these people?
It was a mutual option.  The press account does not state who severed the agreement but it was likely Lind thinking he will get more than $5 million on the market.

Offline Slateman

  • Posts: 41591
Re: 2017-2018 Off-season Discussion Thread
« Reply #182: November 02, 2017, 09:03:22 PM »
It was a mutual option.  The press account does not state who severed the agreement but it was likely Lind thinking he will get more than $5 million on the market.

Janes is reporting it was the Nats who declined.

https://mobile.twitter.com/chelsea_janes/status/926213045919109120?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet


Offline Slateman

  • Posts: 41591
Re: 2017-2018 Off-season Discussion Thread
« Reply #184: November 02, 2017, 09:10:38 PM »
Makes no sense.  He is cheap at $5 million.


*Shrug*
Fire Rizzo?

Offline Natsinpwc

  • Posts: 9782
Re: 2017-2018 Off-season Discussion Thread
« Reply #185: November 02, 2017, 09:12:19 PM »
*Shrug*
Fire Rizzo?
Or the Lerners are cheap. 

I wonder if what she reported was a mistake?  He was such a positive on the team this year.

Offline bluestreak

  • Posts: 2812
Re: 2017-2018 Off-season Discussion Thread
« Reply #186: November 02, 2017, 09:19:46 PM »
The only thing I can imagine is that Rizzo evaluated the market for FA bats and decided that Lind wasn’t going to get $5 million anywhere. Given what they fetched at deadline, that may be true.

Offline Natsinpwc

  • Posts: 9782
Re: 2017-2018 Off-season Discussion Thread
« Reply #187: November 02, 2017, 09:21:42 PM »
The only thing I can imagine is that Rizzo evaluated the market for FA bats and decided that Lind wasn’t going to get $5 million anywhere. Given what they fetched at deadline, that may be true.
Probably because he had only two hits in the post season....in three at bats.

Offline whytev

  • Posts: 8768
Re: 2017-2018 Off-season Discussion Thread
« Reply #188: November 02, 2017, 09:56:47 PM »
It was a mutual option.  The press account does not state who severed the agreement but it was likely Lind thinking he will get more than $5 million on the market.

Castillo tweeted team.

Offline zimm_da_kid

  • Posts: 6928
  • Show me Otani
Re: 2017-2018 Off-season Discussion Thread
« Reply #189: November 02, 2017, 10:09:44 PM »
I want wellington Castillo signed to platoon/split time/take over with/for wieters

Additionally, Pat Neshak is routinely dominant and could be had on a 1 or 2 year deal. 

Offline Natsinpwc

  • Posts: 9782
Re: 2017-2018 Off-season Discussion Thread
« Reply #190: November 02, 2017, 10:58:13 PM »
Castillo tweeted team.
Ok, I think its a major mistake. 

Offline aBaltoNat

  • Posts: 815
Re: 2017-2018 Off-season Discussion Thread
« Reply #191: November 02, 2017, 11:47:20 PM »
I like Castillo as well but we can't tie that much money up in catchers.

Offline whytev

  • Posts: 8768
Re: 2017-2018 Off-season Discussion Thread
« Reply #192: November 03, 2017, 12:18:11 AM »
I want wellington Castillo signed to platoon/split time/take over with/for wieters

Additionally, Pat Neshak is routinely dominant and could be had on a 1 or 2 year deal.

Guy I meant the beat reporter.

Re: 2017-2018 Off-season Discussion Thread
« Reply #193: November 03, 2017, 10:51:28 AM »
I was surprised at the report the Nats declined the 5 mill option.  I always assumed Lind would.  Maybe that's a mistake in reporting?  Does that mean that Lind was going to exercise the option had the Nats also exercised on their end?  I'd be curious to get clarity.

I figured at, what, 34...Lind would seek a final multi-year deal as a DH in the AL.  At least get 2 years if not 3.  Cash in on a great 2017.  Maybe if we did decline Rizzo just thinks he can find another Lind reclamation project for the 1 mill he gave Lind in 2016?

Offline whytev

  • Posts: 8768
Re: 2017-2018 Off-season Discussion Thread
« Reply #194: November 03, 2017, 11:57:10 AM »
I was surprised at the report the Nats declined the 5 mill option.  I always assumed Lind would.  Maybe that's a mistake in reporting?  Does that mean that Lind was going to exercise the option had the Nats also exercised on their end?  I'd be curious to get clarity.

I figured at, what, 34...Lind would seek a final multi-year deal as a DH in the AL.  At least get 2 years if not 3.  Cash in on a great 2017.  Maybe if we did decline Rizzo just thinks he can find another Lind reclamation project for the 1 mill he gave Lind in 2016?

If the team declines it’s an extra half a mil.

Offline Ray D

  • Posts: 9022
Re: 2017-2018 Off-season Discussion Thread
« Reply #195: November 03, 2017, 01:54:14 PM »
ON a mutual option, who has to accept/decline first - team or player?

Offline imref

  • Posts: 24282
  • 1B: The New Hot Corner
Re: 2017-2018 Off-season Discussion Thread
« Reply #196: November 03, 2017, 02:03:30 PM »
Weiters executes his option, he'll be back next year.

Offline JCA-CrystalCity

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 23943
  • Platoon - not just a movie, a baseball obsession
Re: 2017-2018 Off-season Discussion Thread
« Reply #197: November 03, 2017, 02:29:40 PM »
I was surprised at the report the Nats declined the 5 mill option.  I always assumed Lind would.  Maybe that's a mistake in reporting?  Does that mean that Lind was going to exercise the option had the Nats also exercised on their end?  I'd be curious to get clarity.

I figured at, what, 34...Lind would seek a final multi-year deal as a DH in the AL.  At least get 2 years if not 3.  Cash in on a great 2017.  Maybe if we did decline Rizzo just thinks he can find another Lind reclamation project for the 1 mill he gave Lind in 2016?
do you suppose there may be a wink and a nod to get him off the 40 man roster before the Rule 5 draft, and then to bring him back for multiple years after they put someone on the 60 day DL?  Maybe nothing specific, but let him know an offer is on the table, say he can hunt for better, and he's welcome back.  I do think there will be a FA 1B left over towards late January that we can go in on.  Wouldn't a guy like Moreland be the first LH 1B / OF to sign to get offers in the market?  I think Rizzo thinks he'll be there when we want to sign someone, and, if not, there's always filler.

Offline RobDibblesGhost

  • Posts: 27171
Re: 2017-2018 Off-season Discussion Thread
« Reply #198: November 03, 2017, 03:04:10 PM »
Weiters executes his option, he'll be back next year.

There's a shocker :smh:  I guess he can only get better next year, huh?

Offline rbw5t

  • Posts: 622
Re: 2017-2018 Off-season Discussion Thread
« Reply #199: November 03, 2017, 03:25:28 PM »
I was surprised at the report the Nats declined the 5 mill option.  I always assumed Lind would.  Maybe that's a mistake in reporting?  Does that mean that Lind was going to exercise the option had the Nats also exercised on their end?  I'd be curious to get clarity.

I figured at, what, 34...Lind would seek a final multi-year deal as a DH in the AL.  At least get 2 years if not 3.  Cash in on a great 2017.  Maybe if we did decline Rizzo just thinks he can find another Lind reclamation project for the 1 mill he gave Lind in 2016?

I think everyone had been saying all along that the option was unlikely to be exercised, bc the team wouldn't pay him $5m to be a bench guy.  I don't necessarily agree that a good bench player isn't worth a substantial contract, but I think this was the expected outcome.