Pogotheostrich wrote:I don't see how it can be anyone but Arizona at this point. They owe Troy Glaus and Russ Ortiz $78 million over the next 4 years. How are the Mets even close in the poll? Yes, Benson is overpaid (3 years $22.5 million) and Pedro might be declining ($53 million for 4 years) but which team improved it self more for next year? The Mets IMO. The Mets also have a much larger budget than Arizona.
Team A with a $70 million a year budget blows around $75 million over the next 4 years and gets an overrated SP and a chronically injured 3B who hits for power and no average.
Team B with a $100 million a year budget blows around $75 million over the next 4 years and gets an overrated SP and a HOF pitcher in decline.
Neither are good moves IMO but Arizona is on crack.
Can't even see how the Mets are on this list. The A's and D'backs are by far the ones to question. The A's traded Mulder and Hudson for unproven talent. They did not get a proven player for either. That may be a worse crime than the D'backs crying poverty and then way overpaying for two mediocre at best players so that they can lose 95 games next season instead of 105.
Pogotheostrich wrote:I don't see how it can be anyone but Arizona at this point. They owe Troy Glaus and Russ Ortiz $78 million over the next 4 years. How are the Mets even close in the poll? Yes, Benson is overpaid (3 years $22.5 million) and Pedro might be declining ($53 million for 4 years) but which team improved it self more for next year? The Mets IMO. The Mets also have a much larger budget than Arizona.
Team A with a $70 million a year budget blows around $75 million over the next 4 years and gets an overrated SP and a chronically injured 3B who hits for power and no average.
Team B with a $100 million a year budget blows around $75 million over the next 4 years and gets an overrated SP and a HOF pitcher in decline.
Neither are good moves IMO but Arizona is on crack.
Can't even see how the Mets are on this list. The A's and D'backs are by far the ones to question. The A's traded Mulder and Hudson for unproven talent. They did not get a proven player for either. That may be a worse crime than the D'backs crying poverty and then way overpaying for two mediocre at best players so that they can lose 95 games next season instead of 105.
Yanks04 - I still dont think you get it either when you make those remarks about the A's. It was simply a salary move - they had to do it or lose them with 0 return like they did with Giambi and Tejada.
That may hold true for Hudson,,,not for Mulder. And trading them for prospects and not much else? Why they deal for Kendall then if they are so hard up for cash? What is more important a top SP or a mediocre C? You tell me they couldnot hold Hudson intil June and trade him to a contender in need of a SP for a lot more than what they got?
seems to me that SPs are at a premium as it is - you might be taking a chance if you are betting that the market for them actually increases from this point.
Regardless, what they did was strip two clubs of their best prospects - if you cant see the value of that from a salary strapped perspective, then I dont know what to tell you.
Same here, Why in the world would you trade Hudson in the off season? Hes an ACE, look at what the M's did in 1998? They go great players for Johnson, A's could have done the same. Also, Mulder still had 2006 on his contract, why would they trade him?
Same here, Why in the world would you trade Hudson in the off season? Hes an ACE, look at what the M's did in 1998? They go great players for Johnson, A's could have done the same.
You mean Freddy Garcia and Carlos Guillen?
I'm willing to bet that Haren will equal Garcia's numbers when it's all said and done. Charles Thomas is every bit the prospect that Guillen ever was. Cruz ain't too bad, neither. I think the A's did fine.
I just think that saying the A's had the worst offseason is shortsighted. Maybe they will end up being terrible trades - but then again, maybe they just ripped off a couple teams. Its way to early to tell.
I think the inteeligence of Yahoo Sports goers is summed up well by the public league drafts...This poll does not help thier case any. Really why are you on yahoo sports if you obviously no little to nothing about what is going on in sports. READ SOME OF THE ARTICLES.
"I do not think baseball of today is any better than it was 30 years ago... I still think Radbourne is the greatest of the pitchers." John Sullivan 1914-Old athletes never change.
El Gaupo wrote:It's still a little pre -mature to have a poll like this..
the poll says "so far..." agian it isn't my poll it is yahoo's.
"I do not think baseball of today is any better than it was 30 years ago... I still think Radbourne is the greatest of the pitchers." John Sullivan 1914-Old athletes never change.
Cafe Home
Fantasy Football
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by TheYanks04 » Wed Dec 22, 2004 12:58 pm 
