DonnieD

Right! It's not a run down..Javy can't be 'safe at home'. I counted 6 different idiotic things the Pirates did on the play: 1. Not stepping on first right away 2. Not more aggressively running towards home 3. Throwing to the catcher 4. Second baseman not covering 1st 5. Catcher not immediately running towards Javy while he was making the safe gesture 6. Errant throw to 1B allowing him to reach 7. 2B missing the next throw would've saved a run and if all things stayed the same the game would've gone to extras. The 2B made probably the worst catch attempt possible, likely because he was incredulous at what was occurring. 8. The catcher deciding that the correct play is to try to tag Willson instead of Javy, when Javy was basically sitting in his lap, Christmas list in hand.

Nothing is going to top that one...

If that is the choice, sign me up for Kluber and Pollack too. Let the White Sox have Harper.

So now just go sign Pollack and we’ll effectively have Machado and Harper for half the cost of either individually.

It is not like any money paid to Bryce Harper has to immediately come out of the Ricketts’ pockets, it is very safe to assume it will come from the future profits of the club. The net worth of the Ricketts family will continue to grow regardless of the (within reason) contract that Bryce Harper gets.

There is no we, I’m pretty sure only one person is mixing them

He is saying 1/2 billion as in 500 million. I read it wrong at first too. It is still wrong but closer. I like that they made 3 billion in 2016!?!

James Paxton is NOT a pen arm.

Is that the “middle class tax cut” I keep hearing about that should be finalized by Monday?

That is interesting. I would do that. Pujols is worthless, so you’re basically paying $60M per to have Trout for the next two years and then paying $30M in 2021 for the privilege of having had Trout the two previous years. I wouldn’t give up much unless they were taking Heyward back, like just Almora or something. Value wise that might be pretty close to $/win. Also wouldn’t need to extend Trout in that scenario, just add him to the window of the next two years and reevaluate after that.

I’ve heard there is a possibility that the Angels may look to move Trout if they cannot extend him this offseason. I wonder how interested he is in winning or if he just wants to stay comfortable in Anaheim. IF they do decide to move him, what are the odds the Cubs is would look that direction instead of Harper? What would it take to have the best player in baseball for 2 years while paying him almost $70M? I’d think you’d want a chance to extend him first, $400M for 10 years? More? What would be enough going to the Angels? Schwarber, Happ/Almora, Alzolay, +, +?

He's rated as one of the best corner outfielders in the game right now [attachment=0]Screen Shot 2018-05-30 at 2.48.51 PM.png[/attachment] That’s the joke

He’s a DH, not even a passable fielder

But, but, but... if you listen to sports talk radio he isn’t even a passable defender and must be traded immediately to an AL team so he can DH.

Then make it 23 years instead of 25. I’m not sure the commissioner’s office would be able to tell one of the game’s biggest stars he’s not allowed to play until he is the same age that Julio Franco, Jamie Moyer, Bartolo Colon, and several other people have played to.

Does anyone think Bryce needs the largest total dollar contract *and* the highest AAV contract for his ego? If not the just offer him 25/$500 and call it a day. Front load with some opt outs and stay under the LT.

He has stayed healthy enough to post bWARs of 7.3, 5.5, and 5.1 the last three years. If he actually can stay healthy for a full season he is a 7 win player. That is a no-brainer for a guy locked up through 2023, and ~ $10 M per is not expensive in LT regards. Happ and Almora would have to take huge steps forward to out value Kiermaier.

I was wondering this about Kiermeier as well. Is be a free agent after 2020? Could we get him for Happ and one of our top arms? Does anyone think that is too much?

Trout's already passed him also with Trout, funny to consider the only realistic way he could possibly miss the Hall right now is if he has a 70 HR season Make that 61 HR year, there has never been anyone elected who has a 61+ HR season. Funny to think that with 7 such seasons so far, there is a non-zero chance it could actually stay that way.

If Jersey sales can be used as an indicator, Kershaw is quite popular, though he trails both Bryant and Rizzo since the Cubs have become good. In 2017 Baez was also better selling than the 2nd place Dodger (Seager) and even Schwarber(!) was ahead of the 2nd place Yankee (Sanchez) and in 14th place in MLB. This is a year when the Dodgers were historically good and all three teams were in the playoffs.

How are you measuring fame or level of celebrity? I would argue Star players from good Cubs teams are every bit as famous as Yankee or Dodger superstars. I don't agree with that at all. Hell, David Ross is arguably the most famous person from the WS team (COME AT ME, BROS). Bottom line, if it's about fame/name recognition, nothing beats if you're perceived as a great player on a good Yankees team. That trounces the Dodgers, too. So you’re measuring based on your perception?

How are you measuring fame or level of celebrity? I would argue Star players from good Cubs teams are every bit as famous as Yankee or Dodger superstars.

Eh, I'm honestly not that sure about that. This is MLB coming down super hard on a team being super stupid. Coppolella and the gang were really stupid and brazen. Trying to package guys from different classes, including a year you're under the penalty? I think there's a wink-wink, nudge-nudge to how things get done in that market, but the Braves went a bit too far, plus they were stupid with hiding things. And trying to do a package deal with a 14 year old? They were just too brazen and too dumb. On top of that, Coppolella was hated by the rest of the league. If it were someone else, I honestly doubt the penalty would have been as harsh. He just pissed everyone off, by being greedy. And then by being stupid. I think all this does is helps get rid of the buscones and makes teams cover their tracks a bit better. Now that the precedent has been set, teams would be STUPID to even try it. Packaging bonuses can lead to a lifetime ban. You can’t do it for an impact guy because it would be obvious. Why would you take the risk for a non-top 30 guy when the chances they will even be major leaguers is slim? Plus as dirty as international markets are, you could have buscones bribing you not to dish dirt to MLB, that could suddenly be more profitable than peddling prospects. If I’m Theo Epstein especially, why would I risk a lifetime ban, tens of millions in future income, and no HOF induction (that is certainly coming) so I can get a few marginal prospects that have a very slight chance of becoming an impact player. If the organization can be out $15M in bonuses plus the personnel penalties, I could see a 16 year old bonus guy who flames out by age 18 and has only pocketed a total of $600k (but the team reported $300K) demanding more money not to talk. There is suddenly too much risk for too little reward in my opinion, this stuff will be a thing of the past. The large majority of teams won’t participate so if a team does decide to be shady, it will stand out since it won’t be SOP anymore and it won’t blend in with what everyone is doing.

Well, now that a lifetime ban is in the cards you can bet that it won’t be a common thing anymore.

Replaced by David Ross?