Author Topic: Top priority: catcher  (Read 4164 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline DPMOmaha

  • Posts: 22103
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #100: October 18, 2017, 07:13:34 PM »
Hey, we have two next year. That's 200% more good relievers than we had going into the 2017 season
2 is 200% more than 0?

Offline Slateman

  • Posts: 45772
  • thanosdidnothingwrong
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #101: October 18, 2017, 08:07:05 PM »

Online HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 19665
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #102: October 19, 2017, 09:10:30 AM »
200% increase

200 = 0/2 * 100? not sure about that

Online imref

  • Posts: 27149
  • 1B: The New Hot Corner

Offline Natsinpwc

  • Posts: 12966
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #104: October 19, 2017, 10:34:27 AM »
Realmuto?

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2017/10/how-can-the-nationals-improve-behind-the-plate.html

Realmuto would be good but I doubt that Rizzo will offer what it would take. Cameron Rupp seems more like a Lerners/Rizzo kind of guy. Not that good but cheap. He is considered solid defensively I believe. His hitting dropped off this year from 2016. Phillies seem ready to move onto Alfaro as their catcher although he is rough defensively with Knapp as the likely back up.

Offline Slateman

  • Posts: 45772
  • thanosdidnothingwrong
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #105: October 19, 2017, 10:37:23 AM »
200 = 0/2 * 100? not sure about that

0.00 + 2.00 = 200% increase.

Offline Slateman

  • Posts: 45772
  • thanosdidnothingwrong
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #106: October 19, 2017, 10:41:34 AM »
Realmuto?

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2017/10/how-can-the-nationals-improve-behind-the-plate.html
Realmuto would be good but I doubt that Rizzo will offer what it would take. Cameron Rupp seems more like a Lerners/Rizzo kind of guy. Not that good but cheap. He is considered solid defensively I believe. His hitting dropped off this year from 2016. Phillies seem ready to move onto Alfaro as their catcher although he is rough defensively with Knapp as the likely back up.
Again, what do we do with Wieters?  I'm down with trading for Realmuto. I have a feeling it will be quite costly. Soto and/or Fedde would certainly be involved. But you have a 10 million dollar catcher that isn't very good. Who is going to take him?

Offline JCA-CrystalCity

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 25669
  • Platoon - not just a movie, a baseball obsession
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #107: October 19, 2017, 10:49:49 AM »
Scrolling through those comments, R Perez or Gomes from Cleveland should be available and S. Perez from KC would be a costlier option.  Both Gomes and Roberto Perez have shown streaks of acceptability.  It  may be hard to swallow, but Sandy Leon might need to be moved to create space for Swihart, who is out of options.

Offline Natsinpwc

  • Posts: 12966
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #108: October 19, 2017, 10:54:10 AM »
Again, what do we do with Wieters?  I'm down with trading for Realmuto. I have a feeling it will be quite costly. Soto and/or Fedde would certainly be involved. But you have a 10 million dollar catcher that isn't very good. Who is going to take him?
I don't think they can do anything with Wieters. Just let him be the back up or split the duties and maybe he will regain some hitting form.

Offline Slateman

  • Posts: 45772
  • thanosdidnothingwrong
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #109: October 19, 2017, 10:56:28 AM »
I don't think they can do anything with Wieters. Just let him be the back up or split the duties and maybe he will regain some hitting form.
There's no way Boras is going to let his client split time/be a back up in a contract year in what will probably be his last pay day. And frankly, I'm not willing to spend that kind of money on a back up when this team can put it to use else where.

Offline GburgNatsFan

  • Posts: 19293
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #110: October 19, 2017, 10:57:18 AM »
Do you think Boras has that kind of control over the Nats? Or do you think he'd persuade Wieters to find other work?

There's no way Boras is going to let his client split time/be a back up in a contract year in what will probably be his last pay day. And frankly, I'm not willing to spend that kind of money on a back up when this team can put it to use else where.

Offline Slateman

  • Posts: 45772
  • thanosdidnothingwrong
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #111: October 19, 2017, 10:58:26 AM »
Do you think Boras has that kind of control over the Nats? Or do you think he'd persuade Wieters to find other work?

I think it's pretty obvious that Boras has influence over the Learners.

Offline whytev

  • Posts: 8768
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #112: October 19, 2017, 11:21:09 AM »
0.00 + 2.00 = 200% increase.

That’s an infinite increase.

Offline dracnal

  • Posts: 1167
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #113: October 19, 2017, 11:22:15 AM »
That’s an infinite increase.

I'm kind of surprised Mathguy isn't weeping uncontrollably at the mathbomination.

Offline Natsinpwc

  • Posts: 12966
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #114: October 19, 2017, 11:22:25 AM »
That’s an infinite increase.
Calling Mathguy.

I think you are right because the increase of 2 is still divided by zero.

Offline Natsinpwc

  • Posts: 12966
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #115: October 19, 2017, 11:23:35 AM »
I think it's pretty obvious that Boras has influence over the Learners.
I don't think there is any evidence that the Lerners are making decisions about who plays and who sits. Seems clear Wieters cannot take on a big workload anymore. Bring someone in and let them fight it out.

Offline dracnal

  • Posts: 1167
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #116: October 19, 2017, 11:24:43 AM »
Calling Mathguy.

I think you are right because the increase of 2 is still divided by zero.

All math jokes aside, Slate's basic point is we have two solid options in the bullpen locked in for next year. This is far better than last year when we had zero options locked in to start the year. The job isn't done and we need more people to fill it out, but it's not as alarming a situation as this time last year.

Offline whytev

  • Posts: 8768
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #117: October 19, 2017, 11:30:24 AM »
Calling Mathguy.

I think you are right because the increase of 2 is still divided by zero.

1-3 is a 200% increase. His statement is fine if we started with 1.

Offline dracnal

  • Posts: 1167
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #118: October 19, 2017, 11:36:44 AM »
Maybe count Albers then?

Offline dcpatti

  • Posts: 3051
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #119: October 19, 2017, 12:43:54 PM »
Maybe count Albers then?

We have to get a contract on him first.

Offline Ray D

  • Posts: 10073
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #120: October 19, 2017, 12:56:39 PM »
1-3 is a 200% increase.
Right.  And 1 to 2 is a 100% increase  and .5 to 2 is a 300% increase.  .1 to 2 is a 1900% increase.     And so on, as the base decreases the percent increase tends towards infinity.  0 to 2, the increase is infinite. 

Offline bluestreak

  • Posts: 6149
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #121: October 19, 2017, 01:12:11 PM »
It’s time to close this thread 😉


Offline Slateman

  • Posts: 45772
  • thanosdidnothingwrong
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #122: October 19, 2017, 01:17:33 PM »
I don't think there is any evidence that the Lerners are making decisions about who plays and who sits. Seems clear Wieters cannot take on a big workload anymore. Bring someone in and let them fight it out.
I think when you sign a guy for big money, there is an expectation that he will be the starter. So with that contract, Wieters is expected to play the majority of the games at the position.

Offline JCA-CrystalCity

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 25669
  • Platoon - not just a movie, a baseball obsession
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #123: October 19, 2017, 01:32:21 PM »
We have to get a contract on him first.
whoa . . . having visions of a Joe Pesci movie.

Online imref

  • Posts: 27149
  • 1B: The New Hot Corner
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #124: October 19, 2017, 01:51:28 PM »
Again, what do we do with Wieters?  I'm down with trading for Realmuto. I have a feeling it will be quite costly. Soto and/or Fedde would certainly be involved. But you have a 10 million dollar catcher that isn't very good. Who is going to take him?

he's the backup, and you try and ignore the fact that you are paying him $10.5 million.  He wouldn't be the first FA bust.