Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 23
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Creepyville, USA
    Posts
    27,267
    vCash
    1500

    Wednesday Hypothetical : Would ya?

    You cannot substitute. Either you would or wouldn't.

    Arod, Tex and Fatty for Pujols. Right now.
    Leo's Thought Of The Day




    Statistics are used much like a drunk uses a lamppost: for support, not illumination.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    14,377
    vCash
    9209
    No. Contract wise yes but arod+tex+fatty> pooholes
    LET'S GO

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    2,435
    vCash
    1500
    Not a chance. Pujols is under contract for way too much time. All 3 of ours will be done in 3 years, and we'd still have a half decade left of Pujols.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Somewhere within the transmutation of Yin and Yang
    Posts
    9,475
    vCash
    1500
    No way. Poohole isn't as fun. And the Years left on the contract



    Me and my RC
    Me and my RC

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    11,665
    vCash
    1500
    No, but I had to think about it.

    The money owed Pujols is about the same as is owed to the other three combined - it's just spread out over a longer period of time. I think we will probably get more value out of the three guys we have than we would out of Pujols though.
    <a href=http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/29/Ichiro_Suzuki_on_August_1%2C_2012.jpg/240px-Ichiro_Suzuki_on_August_1%2C_2012.jpg target=_blank>http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi..._1%2C_2012.jpg</a>

    STEPHEN DREW

    BA: .000 HR: 0 RBI: 0

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Rhode Island
    Posts
    24,063
    vCash
    1500
    Even though the money is the same we would save a lot in luxury taxes over the next couple. I get the feeling though that once we get under it in a couple years Hal isn't going to let us go back over, at least not like we do now. So the deal would give us $20 mil less to spend on better players for the extra 5 years Pujols is under contract. As a fan I'd turn the deal down and pay the extra luxury tax now for the better financial flexibility later but I think ownership would easily accept this deal to save the money.


    NE Patriots Forum HOF (Class of 2011)

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,322
    vCash
    1500
    No. Bad contracts all round. Pujols leading the pack. We have light at the end of the tunnel.
    "While I still believed that numbers could reveal things about the game that were invisible to the naked eye, my own eyes had glazed over as the combination of fantasy baseball and mathematical arcana conspired to squeeze the life from the game I loved. John Thorn.

    Didi-esque

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Creepyville, USA
    Posts
    27,267
    vCash
    1500
    I'd also have to think about it. He could help us now, but would put us in a similar situation later.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,300
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by LeoYankee View Post
    You cannot substitute. Either you would or wouldn't.

    Arod, Tex and Fatty for Pujols. Right now.
    I'm not sure. Probably not at this point, because all the free agents of any value are gone and you'd have to replace a pitcher and possibly an OF/DH. If we could commit to Ref in RF, move Beltran to DH and if Nova were ready to start the season and/or Severino were closer to starting the season, then maybe.

    I would have done it hands down if it were offered before Moncada was signed and it meant that we would have gotten him. However, at this point we can ride out the season and have 3 times the money come off the books for next year. It's a close call though, because it saves us the luxury tax, which again would have entirely paid for the Moncada tax.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Cali
    Posts
    941
    vCash
    1500
    Nope.

    I think Tex puts up very comparable numbers to Fat Albert over the next couple years. Plus better D.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Creepyville, USA
    Posts
    27,267
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by masher44 View Post
    Nope.

    I think Tex puts up very comparable numbers to Fat Albert over the next couple years. Plus better D.
    Pooholes would be DH. Use Garrett at 1b.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Creepyville, USA
    Posts
    27,267
    vCash
    1500
    Jake
    Slappy
    Pooholes
    Beltran
    Mcann
    Headley
    Garrett
    Drew
    Didi

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Cali
    Posts
    941
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by LeoYankee View Post
    Jake
    Slappy
    Pooholes
    Beltran
    Mcann
    Headley
    Garrett
    Drew
    Didi
    With our age and injuries, I like rotating DH. Fat Al is breaking down too much.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Creepyville, USA
    Posts
    27,267
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by masher44 View Post
    With our age and injuries, I like rotating DH. Fat Al is breaking down too much.
    Word

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    6,195
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by JammerHammer23 View Post
    Not a chance. Pujols is under contract for way too much time. All 3 of ours will be done in 3 years, and we'd still have a half decade left of Pujols.
    Is there much difference in cost? Seems to me that, if the salary totals are comparable (2 years of Tex, and likely 3 of ARod and CC), I'd rather have the roster space freed up. Besides, knock $50m off this year's payroll, and you might (might) get under the luxury tax threshold, freeing up a lot of money for the FA class next year.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •