Going to break my own thread starting rules here

User avatar
bpj
Posts: 12743
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2019 12:55 am

Re: Going to break my own thread starting rules here

Post by bpj » Tue Nov 29, 2022 7:44 pm

Sexymarinersfan wrote:
Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:49 pm
bpj wrote:
Tue Nov 29, 2022 7:12 am
GL_Storm wrote:
Tue Nov 29, 2022 4:01 am
I would prefer that the organization hold on to the young position player prospects as much as possible, or at least the ones that matter. I like what's going on down there and I don't believe that trading away the farm system makes a whole lot of sense. I would not assume that just because the Astros were able to drain their system and then continue to pump out quality major leaguers, that the Mariners can do the same. One team is able to do that, 29 other teams are not.
I'd prefer that too.

It doesn't really matter which minor leaguers they trade away at this point imo. Guys like Young and Ford are both too far away to have an impact within the next 4 years and if the MLB rotation is full, the pitchers aren't doing us any good rotting in AAA when we have offensive holes at the MLB level.

That leaves plenty of time to figure out the next few guys that will contribute at the MLB level by 2027 when they may be needed.

Our MLB roster's pretty set until that point anyways imo. I mean, if they think they have another Julio, by all means keep him. But they need to fill LF, 2B, DH at the MLB level one way or another.

I'm all for them spending to fill the holes. I just don't think they will. But they still have to fill the holes.

Just turn around and trade the vets as their contracts expire like the Jay's did with Hernandez to refill the minors. Stop letting guys like Mitch Haniger walk without getting a return in other words.

Jose Abreu just got 3/$60 but they didn't think it was worth risking a $19M QO to Haniger which would have netted an extra draft pick or filled an obvious hole.
Are you telling me you would have signed Mitch Haniger to a 1-year $19M contract this offseason? No way the M's were tagging him. We all knew that. That being said, I wouldn't mind Mitch coming back to play for us if that's what Seattle wanted. I just think they've already addressed that in Teo. Time to get a lefty like Nimmo or Conforto
What I would have done is traded Mitch when it was clear he wasn't going to sign an extension and would have moved on from him at that point like the Blue Jays just did with Teoscar.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=4786&hilit=trade+mi ... 20#p106534
(This is a great thread to read through to see some of the excuses people used for not trading Mitch. Then, he gets hurt and we got ZERO in return for him leaving.)

Once it got to this point, to offer him a QO for a one year deal, with the chance of adding a draft pick if he says no, yeah, I would have done that also, especially if I thought guys like Abreu would get 3/$60 on the market.

I'd much prefer 1/$19 for Mitch than 3/$60M for Abreu at age 37, for example.

It's better than $14M + losing 3 players for one year of Teoscar, who you claim is redundant to Mitch.

That's like you guys are saying, "Who needs two good bats on the team when you could have one??"

Teoscar + Haniger >>>>> Teoscar

Haniger + $100M you didn't spend on Nimmo > Nimmo.

And they still could have fit Nimmo or Conforto- we still need a RF and a DH and there is no salary cap. That's the point, they could put the money to whoever they want. A one year deal shouldn't have changed anything for them, especially when they have a giant gaping hole at DH.

Mitch on a 1 year $19M contract would have been a gift, especially if guys like Jose Abreu are getting 3/$60M.

Post Reply