or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment and Culture › MLB 2009 - 2010 Season Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

MLB 2009 - 2010 Season Thread - Page 3

post #31 of 625
Quote:
Originally Posted by thekunk07 View Post
i will bet a ball that reyes' thyroid issue is due to gh and t3.

I said it last year and I'll say it this year. Blow....this....team....up, and start over. Trade everyone not named Wright...yes that includes Reyes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kwiteaboy View Post
The Royals are in stiff competition with the Mets for "worst-run organization in professional sports", but I think the Royals are winning.

Two words, Pittsburgh Pirates.
post #32 of 625
Quote:
Originally Posted by StephenHero View Post
Mets: $1,419,000 per win
Royals: $883,000 per win
Don't like the logic. Certainly there is increasing marginal cost of wins.
post #33 of 625
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slopho View Post
Two words, Pittsburgh Pirates.

The Pirates have some reason for hope with Huntington. Very small, but some.
post #34 of 625
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwiteaboy View Post
The Pirates have some reason for hope with Huntington. Very small, but some.

They have a decent core. I would say Doumit and McCutchen (Andrew) look really good, but the sleeper is Garrett Jones. He's going to have a monster year.

I just meant regarding worst run franchises.
post #35 of 625
Quote:
Originally Posted by BossTweed View Post
Don't like the logic. Certainly there is increasing marginal cost of wins.

A better metric might be comparing payroll rank vs. regular season wins rank, but that makes the Mets' ineptitude even more lopsided.
post #36 of 625
Quote:
Originally Posted by StephenHero View Post
A better metric might be comparing payroll rank vs. regular season wins rank, but that makes the Mets' ineptitude even more lopsided.
As it should be. I couldn't stand the Red Sox until they won the WS for one reason. The Yankees spent 3x as much as the average team, but at least they were winning. The Red Sox spent 2x as much, but they couldn't win; it's like they sucked at cheating. The Mets find themselves in similar circumstances.
post #37 of 625
Quote:
Originally Posted by BossTweed View Post
As it should be. I couldn't stand the Red Sox until they won the WS for one reason. The Yankees spent 3x as much as the average team, but at least they were winning. The Red Sox spent 2x as much, but they couldn't win; it's like they sucked at cheating. The Mets find themselves in similar circumstances.
yeah the sawx of the late 90's early 2000's were just sad. they'd sign someone big that was actually worth it then skimp on the the complimentary players that mattered. then they'd make some sort of reactionary signing (for a washed up star) and overpay and then act cheap again. yup... just like the recent mets. the phillies had a chance to be the best national league team... ever (over 3 years at least)... if they just spend 10M more per year and kept Lee. if anything the phillies should of learned from the last WS that if they had that 2nd ace it would of made a world of difference. the two ace system with that offense would of been sick.
post #38 of 625
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by LawrenceMD View Post
yeah the sawx of the late 90's early 2000's were just sad. they'd sign someone big that was actually worth it then skimp on the the complimentary players that mattered. then they'd make some sort of reactionary signing (for a washed up star) and overpay and then act cheap again. yup... just like the recent mets.

the phillies had a chance to be the best national league team... ever (over 3 years at least)... if they just spend 10M more per year and kept Lee.

if anything the phillies should of learned from the last WS that if they had that 2nd ace it would of made a world of difference.

the two ace system with that offense would of been sick.

They can always get one mid-season like last year.
post #39 of 625
The Twins are looking at making Liriano the closer. He's just about to enter Kerry Wood territory.
post #40 of 625
^That actually might not be a horrible idea.
post #41 of 625
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dakota rube View Post
^That actually might not be a horrible idea.

Yeah but still sad to see guys that can be so dominant side tracked by numerous injuries that hamper their whole careers. Him, Harden, Zumaya, Wood, etc.
post #42 of 625
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BDC2823 View Post
Yeah but still sad to see guys that can be so dominant side tracked by numerous injuries that hamper their whole careers. Him, Harden, Zumaya, Wood, etc.

Better than flipping burgers.

I like Liriano at closer, but that would leave a gap in the rotation they need to fill.
post #43 of 625
mets opening day lineup makes the royals and pirates laugh. pagan, castillo, cora, murphy, etc. good stuff. pitching is solid too. a former #1 and 4 #5s.
post #44 of 625
I highly doubt this would happen, but a Howard for Pujols deal would be an absolute boon for the Cardinals.

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_yl...ujolsforhoward

This same thing was talked about 50 years ago. It was Williams for DiMaggio. That trade too went nowhere.
post #45 of 625
Isn't St. Louis loaded this year and the clear favorite in the NL Central? I guess Howard is younger, so you could have him longer even though Pujols is better, but I don't think you should do anything to make your team worse tomorrow in the hopes that it pays off 5 years from now if you're already in position to get another ring today.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Entertainment and Culture
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment and Culture › MLB 2009 - 2010 Season Thread