Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 223 of 277 FirstFirst ... 123173213221222223224225233273 ... LastLast
Results 3,331 to 3,345 of 4143
  1. #3331
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    16,438
    Quote Originally Posted by dayners81 View Post
    Players are always " willing" to miss games until they start missing checks. I'm not sure how long veterans are going to be willing to miss that many checks to get younger players paid when most of the guys have already been through that.
    Bullseye.

  2. #3332
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    16,438
    Quote Originally Posted by dayners81 View Post
    I think Rizzo is the most likely solution but if they could get Olsen without giving up Volpe, Peraza or Dom, that would be hard to turn down. Then again i would hate to have given up Alcantara for only 2 months of Rizzo
    There's the rub. Not likely Oakland takes less.

  3. #3333
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Tacoma, Wa
    Posts
    14,518
    Quote Originally Posted by drt1010 View Post
    Bullseye.
    Yeah i have a feeling when guys like Cole, Scherzer, Trout, Betts ect start losing about 1m a week they put pressure on the union to get back to work. Its great that the older players are fighting for the younger players to get paid more and for teams to have less yrs of control but when they start losing checks i think that part of their demands ends. We'll see but unless all the players have been preparing for this, they'll have to loosen their demands.

    It's actually worse for the younger players to miss checks because they haven't gotten big pay days yet so they need that money.

    Quote Originally Posted by drt1010 View Post
    There's the rub. Not likely Oakland takes less.
    Wish they would take Torres and Voit like Bowden first suggested.

    I would much rather Rizzo because i don't think 2yrs of Olsen is going to be that much better than Rizzo to give up Peraza and Gil. Olsen may be cheaper for 1yr, after that he's going to be much more expensive. If you could get Rizzo on a 2yr deal i do that and if we don't have an internal 1st base option by then, sign Olsen in FA

  4. #3334
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    New Jersey/Delaware/PA
    Posts
    2,875
    Quote Originally Posted by drt1010 View Post
    Olson :.252 .348 .511 .859 27 yrs old

    Rizzo: 268 .369 .481 .850 31 yrs old

    Freeman: 295 .384 .509 .893 31 yrs old
    Those are a bit misleading because Olson was much better than that in his last two full seasons, most recently as a 27 year old (I'm not including covid season). Rizzo, on the other hand had his worst season in 2021 as a 31 year old.

    Yes, Olson costs prospects... but he'll actually be less expensive financially (don't care personally about the $4 million but its a consideration), and is the better player of the three skill wise.

    Of the three, I'd take Freddie Freeman for 6 years. He's lefty, he can mash, he can play first base, and it's not an 8-10 year contract. All it takes to sign him is money. You keep your best prospects, and lock down the position for 4 years (years 5 and 6 could get ugly).

    You still have the prospects to make a trade for a big time pitcher to pair with Cole.

    Roll with the following lineup.

    1. DJ 3b
    2. Gleyber 2b
    3. Judge RF
    4. Stanton DH
    5. Freeman 1b
    6. Urshela SS
    7. Gallo LF
    8. Hicks CF
    9. Sanchez C

    If Hicks falters or gets hurt, give the job to Florial. We don't need him to be a superstar. He just has to be serviceable and play a good CF. He couldn't be any worse than Gardner. Or sign Suzuki and let Hicks be the 4th OF - even better. If Peraza, Volpe, or Cabrera become ready, move Urshela to the bench and he and Lemahiue can rotate throughout the infield as utility players.

    For the rotation
    1. Cole
    2. Use trade chips to pick up a #2 let's use Luis Castillo as a place filler her but I'd take any solid #2
    3. Jameson Taillon
    4. Jordan Montgomery
    5. Luis Severino, Domingo German, Nestor Cortes, Luis Gil, Clarke Schmidt, Deivi Garcia, or whoever else seizes the spot.

    The rest of them go to the bullpen and complement the already solid relief corps.

    The only weakness I see on this team is 7-9 in the lineup. If they did get Suzuki that would sure up the 7 slot quite a bit. Maybe the new hitting coaches can fix Gallo. If so 7-9 could surprise us.
    Last edited by Phoba Rama; 01-22-2022 at 07:41 PM.

  5. #3335
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    16,438
    2019-21 Olson: .257 .354 .522 .876

    2019-21 Rizzo: .273 .387 .490 .876

    2019-21 Freeman: 304 .402 .544 .946

    Phoba, not all that different or much better for Olson when averaging last three seasons. Freeman is better than both on paper, but is Hal willing to go the 6/$200M he seeks? Olson is the youngest of the three. Imo Rizzo has the best glove and Freeman the better bat with power. BUT....he isn't coming cheap.

    BTW the numbers in my original post were career numbers for all three.

    Personally I am hoping Rizzo's asking price comes off last seasons number. Yankees save the spects and it's only money with him as well. He seems comfortable in NYC, which is always a consideration.

  6. #3336
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    New Jersey/Delaware/PA
    Posts
    2,875
    Quote Originally Posted by drt1010 View Post
    2019-21 Olson: .257 .354 .522 .876

    2019-21 Rizzo: .273 .387 .490 .876

    2019-21 Freeman: 304 .402 .544 .946

    Phoba, not all that different or much better for Olson when averaging last three seasons. Freeman is better than both on paper, but is Hal willing to go the 6/$200M he seeks? Olson is the youngest of the three. Imo Rizzo has the best glove and Freeman the better bat with power. BUT....he isn't coming cheap.

    BTW the numbers in my original post were career numbers for all three.

    Personally I am hoping Rizzo's asking price comes off last seasons number. Yankees save the spects and it's only money with him as well. He seems comfortable in NYC, which is always a consideration.
    I think its fair to look at the past 3 seasons. I just think it's a big red flag for a 31 year old to have the worst season of their career in a walk year no less. Additionally Olson's 3 year numbers are dragged down significantly by the covid shortened season. I personally think the numbers from that season cannot be taken seriously for so many reasons.

    The advantage of Rizzo is you can get him on a short contract for only money (no way I'd go above 2 years). The disadvantage is that IMO he is the worst player of the three. I'd rather take my chances with a 6byear contract with Freeman than any of the other options. Second choice would be to get Olson - though I'd be conscious of what the prospect cost is to obtain him.

    With Rizzo I feel they are getting a very average first baseman. I don't think he brings the team to the next level, whereas Freddie Freeman definitely does and Olson could too, especially because he has much better power than Rizzo.

  7. #3337
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    63,420
    Olson would put up crazy power numbers at Yankee Stadium.

  8. #3338
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    45,971
    Quote Originally Posted by dayners81 View Post
    Players are always " willing" to miss games until they start missing checks. I'm not sure how long veterans are going to be willing to miss that many checks to get younger players paid when most of the guys have already been through that.
    Tough to say. We'll find out how much standing of their ground the players do. I don't see a 162 game schedule being played though.

  9. #3339
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    16,438
    Quote Originally Posted by Phoba Rama View Post
    I think its fair to look at the past 3 seasons. I just think it's a big red flag for a 31 year old to have the worst season of their career in a walk year no less. Additionally Olson's 3 year numbers are dragged down significantly by the covid shortened season. I personally think the numbers from that season cannot be taken seriously for so many reasons.

    The advantage of Rizzo is you can get him on a short contract for only money (no way I'd go above 2 years). The disadvantage is that IMO he is the worst player of the three. I'd rather take my chances with a 6byear contract with Freeman than any of the other options. Second choice would be to get Olson - though I'd be conscious of what the prospect cost is to obtain him.

    With Rizzo I feel they are getting a very average first baseman. I don't think he brings the team to the next level, whereas Freddie Freeman definitely does and Olson could too, especially because he has much better power than Rizzo.
    I agree. At the right price Olson would be a very good fit, although I wouldn't want to go too long. That in my mind is the rub. The price is too high. I also agree Rizzo didn't help his cause in a walk year. (FWIW I believe the Covid shortened seasoned effected all players.) The determining factor in my mind is the cost in prospects to lure Olson out of Oakland. I think we all know their modus operandi, when it comes to NY they will extract their pound of flesh and then some! Rizzo is only money as is Freeman. Is Olson that much better that he becomes a difference maker? Does he justify the cost in spects (Peraza, Gil, Vasquez) and potential salary ($12-15M) ?

    Imo Rizzo's glove is far from average. His bat ...maybe. Although last season, in a down year he managed 22HR's, 123 total H's with 52 BB in 141 games. IDK, do they need more power? Clown and I have gone back and forth on this issue for quite some time. Too many swing and miss guys and not enough table setting contact bats. Imo Rizzo is that table setter, he takes his walks and gets on base. He has some power but isn't swinging from his heels on every pitch.

  10. #3340
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    16,438
    Quote Originally Posted by spliff(TONE) View Post
    Olson would put up crazy power numbers at Yankee Stadium.
    Does this team, as currently constructed, need more power?

  11. #3341
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Tacoma, Wa
    Posts
    14,518
    As currently constructed, imo they need more contact guys. We already have a ton of power in that lineup with Judge,Stanton,Gallo and to some extent Torres and Sanchez. We also have a massive amount of Ks in that lineup. Freeman would be ideal but 6yr180m is alot for an older player. With Olsen if the cost has to include 1 of our top 3 i would pass, mainly because i think Peraza is going to be special, especially defensively. Rizzo is only gonna cost money. If they don't get Freeman, i would rather get Rizzo back than give 3 of our top 8-10 specs.
    Rizzo down yr, especially his 2nd half could very likely been from having Covid pretty badly and recovering from cancer probably didnt help. Healthy i think he's a better player than he showed in his time here. I still think the glove is elite and the bat is a good fit in the lineup. I would much rather see them use the spec capital to get a legit #2 than overpay for 2yrs of Olsen

  12. #3342
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    63,420
    Quote Originally Posted by drt1010 View Post
    Does this team, as currently constructed, need more power?
    Probably not, though more power is rarely a bad thing. Regardless, that wasn't my point at all.

  13. #3343
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Somewhere within the transmutation of Yin and Yang
    Posts
    42,802
    Quote Originally Posted by Phoba Rama View Post
    I think its fair to look at the past 3 seasons. I just think it's a big red flag for a 31 year old to have the worst season of their career in a walk year no less. Additionally Olson's 3 year numbers are dragged down significantly by the covid shortened season. I personally think the numbers from that season cannot be taken seriously for so many reasons.

    The advantage of Rizzo is you can get him on a short contract for only money (no way I'd go above 2 years). The disadvantage is that IMO he is the worst player of the three. I'd rather take my chances with a 6byear contract with Freeman than any of the other options. Second choice would be to get Olson - though I'd be conscious of what the prospect cost is to obtain him.

    With Rizzo I feel they are getting a very average first baseman. I don't think he brings the team to the next level, whereas Freddie Freeman definitely does and Olson could too, especially because he has much better power than Rizzo.
    If they were all FAs, I would be all in on Olson. I think he has the most upside and I agree with, Splifftone. Olson would put up silly numbers at YS.
    I think the ask is too high for Olson. I don't mind Gil as much as I do Peraza. If they could get around him being included, I would likely make the move.

    I think Freeman at the price he will want is foolish.

    THat's why I think Rizzo is the best option if you don't want to play DJ at first. I am also quite fine with that.



    Ignorance is bliss

  14. #3344
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Somewhere within the transmutation of Yin and Yang
    Posts
    42,802
    Quote Originally Posted by dayners81 View Post
    I've been saying since the season ended that i thought he was the most likely choice to end up at 1st next yr. I'd much rather sign Rizzo than giving up Peraza and Gil for Olsen.

    I really, really like the idea of getting Montas though. Would you be willing to trade Gil and a throw in or 2 for him? i think i would make that deal. We have so many other extremely talented pitching specs coming and Montas solves a big issue for 2yrs until a guys like Medina, Wesneski and Waldichuk could be able to take over that 2-3 role that Montas would fill
    Cole
    Sevy
    Montas
    Monty
    Taillon
    Nestor
    German
    Those guy would make a hell of a rotation and give us enough depth to cover injuries
    If they can hold onto Medina, I have no issue moving Gil for Montas or for any young player who will upgrade the team for the near future.
    The big question, is Montas that much better than Gil? And, even if he is, will he be in another year?
    That's a tricky one. Do you trade the soon to be 24 year old starter with a great arm for the soon to be 29 year old starter who's had a couple really good seasons?



    Ignorance is bliss

  15. #3345
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    16,438
    Quote Originally Posted by spliff(TONE) View Post
    Probably not, though more power is rarely a bad thing. Regardless, that wasn't my point at all.
    What was the point Spliff? I quote " Olson would put up crazy power numbers at Yankee Stadium."

    Personally I love the power guys, no replacing a three run blast. However this team has plenty of power. They need the table setters, high OBP bats.

Posting Permissions

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