What would be the point in trading Thor for the Mets? I feel like if they wanted to trade a starter, Marcus Stroman is the one they should trade. But they literally just traded for him.
Jeffy Jeff, you’re showing your Yankee homerism again… Why “If you’re the Yankees maybe you just take Trout because he’s the best and is controllable for the rest of his career, even if he costs 4x Acuna.”
Why would the Yankees be any different than any other organization? Because they always get the top players? Like Harper and Machado?
It’s because the Yankees have the $ to make it work and. The question was what option would be best. A team like the Pirates would prefer the Acuna contract because they can’t/won’t pay the Trout contract. It’s not homerism, it’s knowing and understanding how teams operate dude.
If every team was on an equal level financially then of course Trout is the easy choice. But they aren’t. This isn’t like a fantasy dynasty league where you get to play with fake monopoly money, this is real life fellas. And there is NO WAY teams like the Pirates, A’s, Rays, Royals, etc would/could ever take on Trout’s contract. NEVER. And I still don’t understand how Jeff’s comment could be interpreted as homerism. Oh well…..
Call me crazy, but I think the Angels might even try and sign Trout to a long contract. I know they are spending big bucks on Pujols and Ohtani and Upton and Simmons and Cozart… but they might just be a team that would do something like that. Not just the Yankees.
White Sox
Dodgers
Phillies
Mets
Rangers
Nationals
There are a lot of teams that would spend big on Trout… not just the Yankees.
Of course there are other teams that would take on Trout’s contract. But given the option of Trout and his contract vs. Acuna and his contract, there are MANY MORE teams who would choose Acuna cuz of budget concerns. This shouldn’t be difficult to understand.
Still don’t know why you think Jeff’s comment was homerism, care to explain buddy?
You do realize that Trout’s average salary for the next 12 years is over $35MM, right? And Acuna’s average salary for the next 8 years is just $12.5MM, right? Trout and Acuna are both worth every penny and a lot more, and there are teams who would choose Trout over Acuna. But there are also teams which CANNOT or WILL NOT ever choose to take on that kind of salary. EVER. You could not be more wrong on this (very hypothetical) discussion sir.
He didn’t mention any other team when talking about Trout… “If you’re the Yankees maybe you just take Trout because he’s the best and is controllable for the rest of his career, even if he costs 4x Acuna.”
Sounds like he thinks the Yankees would take Trout because he’s the best and it doesn’t matter the cost. (Yankees haven”t shown that mentality with Harper or Machado…. ) I bet there are a lot of teams that would take Trout. Like I said before… the Angels might do it… oh wait, they did.
I think the Tigers should take on the Myers salary and a couple top prospects. Maybe a couple marginal relievers like Farmer and Ramirez for Myers, Abrams and Naylor. Myers would be better than almost anything the Tigers have now and he could possibly enjoy a change of scenery. Myers in right, Naylor at first, Abrams about 3 years away.
I rarely get a serious question answered on these chats… which is okay, I guess they get a lot of questions… but they did answer a question from someone called “Dicks Ard”… yeah that makes me feel better.
What was the reason behind the Miami Heat gif?
What would be the point in trading Thor for the Mets? I feel like if they wanted to trade a starter, Marcus Stroman is the one they should trade. But they literally just traded for him.
Jeffy Jeff, you’re showing your Yankee homerism again… Why “If you’re the Yankees maybe you just take Trout because he’s the best and is controllable for the rest of his career, even if he costs 4x Acuna.”
Why would the Yankees be any different than any other organization? Because they always get the top players? Like Harper and Machado?
It’s because the Yankees have the $ to make it work and. The question was what option would be best. A team like the Pirates would prefer the Acuna contract because they can’t/won’t pay the Trout contract. It’s not homerism, it’s knowing and understanding how teams operate dude.
Even if you’re the Pirates you prefer Trout because it means you can afford to skimp elsewhere more than you can with Acuña.
If every team was on an equal level financially then of course Trout is the easy choice. But they aren’t. This isn’t like a fantasy dynasty league where you get to play with fake monopoly money, this is real life fellas. And there is NO WAY teams like the Pirates, A’s, Rays, Royals, etc would/could ever take on Trout’s contract. NEVER. And I still don’t understand how Jeff’s comment could be interpreted as homerism. Oh well…..
Call me crazy, but I think the Angels might even try and sign Trout to a long contract. I know they are spending big bucks on Pujols and Ohtani and Upton and Simmons and Cozart… but they might just be a team that would do something like that. Not just the Yankees.
White Sox
Dodgers
Phillies
Mets
Rangers
Nationals
There are a lot of teams that would spend big on Trout… not just the Yankees.
Of course there are other teams that would take on Trout’s contract. But given the option of Trout and his contract vs. Acuna and his contract, there are MANY MORE teams who would choose Acuna cuz of budget concerns. This shouldn’t be difficult to understand.
Still don’t know why you think Jeff’s comment was homerism, care to explain buddy?
Again, the PIrates would take on Trout’s contract because all of his production means they can afford to skimp more elsewhere.
You do realize that Trout’s average salary for the next 12 years is over $35MM, right? And Acuna’s average salary for the next 8 years is just $12.5MM, right? Trout and Acuna are both worth every penny and a lot more, and there are teams who would choose Trout over Acuna. But there are also teams which CANNOT or WILL NOT ever choose to take on that kind of salary. EVER. You could not be more wrong on this (very hypothetical) discussion sir.
He didn’t mention any other team when talking about Trout… “If you’re the Yankees maybe you just take Trout because he’s the best and is controllable for the rest of his career, even if he costs 4x Acuna.”
Sounds like he thinks the Yankees would take Trout because he’s the best and it doesn’t matter the cost. (Yankees haven”t shown that mentality with Harper or Machado…. ) I bet there are a lot of teams that would take Trout. Like I said before… the Angels might do it… oh wait, they did.
OK, fair enough. While I understand and respect your thoughts, I simply do not agree. No offence.
I think the Tigers should take on the Myers salary and a couple top prospects. Maybe a couple marginal relievers like Farmer and Ramirez for Myers, Abrams and Naylor. Myers would be better than almost anything the Tigers have now and he could possibly enjoy a change of scenery. Myers in right, Naylor at first, Abrams about 3 years away.
I rarely get a serious question answered on these chats… which is okay, I guess they get a lot of questions… but they did answer a question from someone called “Dicks Ard”… yeah that makes me feel better.
I thought I asked a decent question… “Who are you taking in the wildcard games?”
Nationals vs Brewers
A’s vs Rays