Author Topic: 2010 Offseason Wheeling and Dealing (Read 116226 times)

sportsfan882 · « **Reply #1800 on:** January 27, 2010, 12:44:11 pm »

He'll be in the Majors around the time JZ made his debut. Maybe sometime in May.

Galah · « **Reply #1801 on:** January 27, 2010, 12:50:56 pm »

Quote from: ASSCLOWN on January 27, 2010, 12:44:11 pm

He'll be in the Majors around the time JZ made his debut. Maybe sometime in May.

My luck it'll be mid-April, I'm outta town in mid-April....

Kevrock · « **Reply #1802 on:** January 27, 2010, 01:01:57 pm »

How do the Nats typically cap their young starters for activity in a calendar year? Pitches/innings per year? If so, what is the limit/scale?

tomterp · « **Reply #1803 on:** January 27, 2010, 01:14:14 pm »

Quote from: Kevrock on January 27, 2010, 01:01:57 pm

How do the Nats typically cap their young starters for activity in a calendar year? Pitches/innings per year? If so, what is the limit/scale?

I think I saw someone comment (spinman?) that they like to cap at around 130-140% of previous year's innings.

PANatsFan · « **Reply #1804 on:** January 27, 2010, 01:22:51 pm »

Quote from: Lintyfresh85 on January 27, 2010, 12:40:46 pm

Stras will likely be held back to delay arbitration for an extra year.

Till July? Then he can have a year at the league minimum, though, which is pretty funny

I guess the no pay cuts of over 20% rule counts even your first year of arbitration? SS will get PAID then. His last "renewal" year is 3mill

They will go the JZ route and bring him up just late enough to get an extra year of team control. That's my mind fact.

Lintyfresh85 · « **Reply #1805 on:** January 27, 2010, 01:28:42 pm »

Quote from: PANatsFan on January 27, 2010, 01:22:51 pm

Till July? Then he can have a year at the league minimum, though, which is pretty funny

I guess the no pay cuts of over 20% rule counts even your first year of arbitration? SS will get PAID then. His last "renewal" year is 3mill

They will go the JZ route and bring him up just late enough to get an extra year of team control. That's my mind fact.

It's what they should do. Its just smart business.

PANatsFan · « **Reply #1806 on:** January 27, 2010, 01:31:44 pm »

Quote from: Lintyfresh85 on January 27, 2010, 01:28:42 pm

It's what they should do. Its just smart business.

It is. I know it is. But remember how steamed Zim was after getting renewed a couple times. Imagine taking a 90% pay cut. They're better off trying to buy out his arby years (yes I know Boras doesn't like it, but 7 years of SS could be worth a LOT in wins).

JCA-CrystalCity · « **Reply #1807 on:** January 27, 2010, 01:46:57 pm »

Quote from: PANatsFan on January 27, 2010, 01:22:51 pm

They will go the JZ route and bring him up just late enough to get an extra year of team control. That's my mind fact.

Why I've been guessing 4/18 v. milwaukee as his first start.

The Chief · « **Reply #1808 on:** January 27, 2010, 01:48:50 pm »

Quote from: PANatsFan on January 27, 2010, 01:31:44 pm

But remember how steamed Zim was

No I don't. Citation needed.

KnorrForYourMoney · « **Reply #1809 on:** January 27, 2010, 02:03:39 pm »

Wow, freak Garland. What a complete dumbass.

I gotta admit that I really wasn't expecting to hear that the Nats had offered him that much because I thought anyone in their right mind would take more money to play for the Nats and turn down less to play for the freaking Padres.

The Padres? What a joke. They're one of the few teams in the NL this year that might actually be WORSE than the Nats. And even if Garland has a great year, with the way that team's line-up is, he'll probably lose a lot of 2-1 games (the 1 run being produced by Adrian Gonzalez).

Good on the Nats for making the offer.

PANatsFan · « **Reply #1810 on:** January 27, 2010, 02:07:15 pm »

Quote from: Dunnkey on January 27, 2010, 01:48:50 pm

No I don't. Citation needed.

Quote from: PANatsFan on January 27, 2010, 01:31:44 pm

It is. I know it is. But remember how steamed ~~Zim~~ ASSCLOWN was after getting renewed a couple times.

Sorry, I think it was Hanley. My bad. Zim never said one bad thing, it would be out of character.

The Chief · « **Reply #1811 on:** January 27, 2010, 02:11:09 pm »

Quote from: PANatsFan on January 27, 2010, 02:07:15 pm

Sorry, I think it was Hanley. My bad. Zim never said one bad thing, it would be out of character.

To be fair, even if he understands (which he always said he did - good company guy) I'm sure it's annoying. I just don't recall him ever actually complaining publicly.

imref · « **Reply #1812 on:** January 27, 2010, 02:13:35 pm »

Quote from: KnorrForYourMoney on January 27, 2010, 02:03:39 pm

Wow, freak Garland. What a complete dumbass.

I gotta admit that I really wasn't expecting to hear that the Nats had offered him that much because I thought anyone in their right mind would take more money to play for the Nats and turn down less to play for the freaking Padres.

The Padres? What a joke. They're one of the few teams in the NL this year that might actually be WORSE than the Nats. And even if Garland has a great year, with the way that team's line-up is, he'll probably lose a lot of 2-1 games (the 1 run being produced by Adrian Gonzalez).

Good on the Nats for making the offer.

have you been to San Diego? I'd play for a lot less to play half my games out there. :-)

PANatsFan · « **Reply #1813 on:** January 27, 2010, 02:14:48 pm »

Quote from: imref on January 27, 2010, 02:13:35 pm

have you been to San Diego? I'd play for a lot less to play half my games out there. :-)

For 80 days a year I would live pretty much anywhere to earn an extra 15 million guaranteed.

imref · « **Reply #1814 on:** January 27, 2010, 02:43:21 pm »

Quote from: PANatsFan on January 27, 2010, 02:14:48 pm

For 80 days a year I would live pretty much anywhere to earn an extra 15 million guaranteed.

it's a lot more than that, and they play a lot more games in Phoenix, LA, and SFO versus NY, Philly, FL and ATL.

PANatsFan · « **Reply #1815 on:** January 27, 2010, 02:48:16 pm »

Quote from: imref on January 27, 2010, 02:43:21 pm

it's a lot more than that, and they play a lot more games in Phoenix, LA, and SFO versus NY, Philly, FL and ATL.

80 home games - plus offdays, pre and post season, put it at 100. Still, boohoo.

KnorrForYourMoney · « **Reply #1816 on:** January 27, 2010, 03:16:33 pm »

Quote from: imref on January 27, 2010, 02:13:35 pm

have you been to San Diego? I'd play for a lot less to play half my games out there. :-)

What's the point? It's the summer, not the winter. If he can't play a few games in DC/Philly/New York in April then he needs to pick another sport.

Who the hell would want to be in Phoenix in the summer instead of DC or New York?

cmdterps44 · « **Reply #1817 on:** January 27, 2010, 03:23:40 pm »

I wonder what his reason is for playing on the west coast / SD. It sucks but nothing we can do what the man has his mind set on a location.

I hope Hudson has a reason to play here instead of Tampa Bay.

Kevrock · « **Reply #1818 on:** January 27, 2010, 03:39:17 pm »

If someone took less money to play in DC we would all be like this guy:

If it came down to location/happiness, more power to him I guess.

PANatsFan · « **Reply #1819 on:** January 27, 2010, 03:39:43 pm »

Quote from: KnorrForYourMoney on January 27, 2010, 03:16:33 pm

What's the point? It's the summer, not the winter. If he can't play a few games in DC/Philly/New York in April then he needs to pick another sport.

Who the hell would want to be in Phoenix in the summer instead of DC or New York?

The main difference there between Phoenix and DC is the humidity. I can understand for retirees, but isn't humid air what keeps the ball in the park in Denver?