Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 3 of 50 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 739
  1. #31
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    92
    Quote Originally Posted by Burkey3472 View Post
    If they are planning on letting go of RAJ at the end of the year my guess is a new GM will want to name a manager of his own. If they don't let go of RAJ I could easily see Sandberg back for another year.
    RAJ will probably get a front office "promotion", thus Sandberg will most probably last through the season. I just wouldn't want Sandberg managing any young players who may be called up, Nola, is the only real possible. I also wouldn't want Sandberg wearing out the bullpen. The only guys who look like they are enjoying the game are Revere and Frenchy, the older guys don't care and the few young guys are afraid to make a mistake. Have you ever seen Sandberg back up one of his players on the field over a close call. He STROLLS out, nothing happens, occasionally you need to kick some dirt.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Bethlehem
    Posts
    35,958
    As much as I love Hamels, I really want him dealt and get a HUGE return. So many fanbases are undervaluing him tremendously.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack of Blades View Post
    I don't consider Brand New indie. I consider them ****ing awesome and don't belong to a genre.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    15,892
    At this point I'm not sure I see a HUGE return for him though (or at least a major prospect). My guess is they will end up getting back 1 top 50 prospect, 1-2 top 100 prospects (one which is borderline) and another fill in guy. It certainly isn't impossible to get a major haul back for him (a lot of pitchers have in recent years) but I'm not feeling they will (just my gut). Hopefully Cole keeps pitching lights out though and maybe a team will get desperate.

    I do find it funny though that some Boston fans (not all but some) are basically saying they will take Hamels but they won't give up basically any of their top prospects. I understand guys like Swihart/Betts/Bogarts and guys like that have made their major league debuts but I've seen people say Devers and Margot shouldn't be involved.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    19,545
    What you described pretty much is a huge return. Few teams even have 3 top 100 guys.
    Now writing for FanGraphs, RotoGraphs, The Hardball Times, and The Fake Baseball

    Follow me on Twitter for article updates @baseballATeam

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Bethlehem
    Posts
    35,958
    Quote Originally Posted by The A Team View Post
    What you described pretty much is a huge return. Few teams even have 3 top 100 guys.
    Haha. I was going to say the same thing. That's above the normal return value for that caliber pitcher

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    15,892
    When I say huge deal I mean getting a blue clip top 25 prospects back in the deal (which is unlikely). I wouldn't consider say a Reyes/Piscotty/Kamisky who are 3 borderline top 100 prospects a huge return but it certainly wouldn't be a bad return for Hamels. It really just depends on peoples definition of huge return.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    19,545
    I could be wrong, but I think the idea all along was to get one really good prospect and a bunch of crap. They're now saying they'll eat more cash to facilitate a deal. Nor is their position irrational. The Red Sox would be better off this year with Hamels over Betts for example.
    Now writing for FanGraphs, RotoGraphs, The Hardball Times, and The Fake Baseball

    Follow me on Twitter for article updates @baseballATeam

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Salt Lake City
    Posts
    962
    Quote Originally Posted by The A Team View Post
    I could be wrong, but I think the idea all along was to get one really good prospect and a bunch of crap. They're now saying they'll eat more cash to facilitate a deal. Nor is their position irrational. The Red Sox would be better off this year with Hamels over Betts for example.
    The Redsox should jump all over Hamels regardless of the price. I'd rather the Phillies target other teams because some of these "can't miss" Redsox prospects don't thrill me. Dodgers? I'll gladly take one of there promising young players.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    15,892
    If Boston keeps losing and they fall further behind in the standings they might just wait until next year to make any major moves.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    3,818
    That division isn't terribly strong, though. Is there any chance the Dodgers would give up Urias +filler for Hamels?

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    2,649
    They wouldn't give us Urias if we paid all of Hamels contract and then sent them Crawford.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    3,818
    I have a feeling they would.

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    3,507
    Quote Originally Posted by Mandrew View Post
    I have a feeling they would.
    They won't.

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    15,892
    Quote Originally Posted by Mandrew View Post
    That division isn't terribly strong, though. Is there any chance the Dodgers would give up Urias +filler for Hamels?
    If they keep playing the way they have it doesn't matter how bad the division is, they will be out. They do have the bat talent to turn things around though thats for sure.

    As for Urias, if the Dodgers were willing to offer him they probably would have already. So unless they get desperate they wont trade one of their top guys.

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    R.D
    Posts
    17,316
    Ugh I dont wanna see Coil un Boston.

Page 3 of 50 FirstFirst 1234513 ... 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
  •