mtutiger

As promised, that's the goal of the waiver wire churn....

Interesting....

Incredible

100%. This conflict is existential for Ukraine... Putin himself framed it as such with how he characterized it before the invasion. And the existential nature of the conflict impacts the utility of a negotiation. Let's hypothetically say that one condition of a settled negotiation is that Putin must agree that Ukraine have a right to exist and that the Russian government would respect its sovereignty (which should be the absolute bare-minimum of conditions): 1. Does anyone here feel confident he says "Yes"? (I don't) 2. Even in the event of a "Yes", given how frequently Putin has broken agreements and lied over the years, who would believe him? (I wouldn't) That's the problem, if the Russian leader can't even be believed to be interested in the bare minimum requirements that should be required of a negotiation, the mere right of Ukraine to exist, it's hard to understand the point of negotiations and makes it easier to understand why Ukraine wouldn't be interested in them.

Those costs are not lost on me, nor do I suspect they are lost on anyone here. But again, this war isn't happening because of Joe Biden or the US Government or Ukraine.... it's happening because Vladimir Putin made the choice to invade. And more than anyone else, he is the one who deterrmines how long this conflict lasts. Most Ukrainians would view that as a huge win for Putin as well.

Maybe Dr. Oz should have pretended to be from Georgia lol.

Doesn't Vladimir Putin have a "choice" that he could avail himself of in order to avoid more bloodshed? At the end of the day, he is the reason we are here. Not the Ukrainians defending their sovereignty (and the vast majority of whom wish to continue to do so)

Kolten Wong is another name I've seen thrown around.... he would be a good fit (and hits LH)

Exactly. The front office needs to do what it can to replace these guys, but it would be a mistake to read so far into them being let go as to suggest that it means anything about paying guys like Skubal or Greene or Tork down the road... it doesn't. With the exception of maybe Candelario, they are all MLB Cannon Fodder.

Reyes, the Castros, even Candy earned their non-tenders through performance. If they weren't mediocre (or in the case of Candy, unreliable), hard not to imagine them being tendered a contract.

1,280 plate appearances wasnt enough I guess. He needed a few more lol

I'd call it "old news"

May these folks rot in hell

Ahh yes, the fact that Trump's party is doing the exact same thing they do every time he finds himself in controversy, *that* is the story. Just incredible...

No doubt, its like Veep in real life...

Ahh right, staffing issue. Give me a ****ing break.

Wouldn't it be easier / make more sense to fire Avila with the intent to hire someone with the idea they can build a winner?

lol

So firing Al Avila and replacing him with a different PBO, something that was literally a required condition for fixing this franchise, is a "stall tactic"? That doesn't make any sense... a "stall tactic" would have been to make a bunch of excuses for why it was a bad year while retaining Avila.

Ahh, cool, nothing to see here... just the 45th President having dinner with a literal neo-Nazi

A couple of things: superiority doesn't factor into anything, I just don't agree with your opinions on this. Nothing personal. Second, I wouldn't even consider my opinion "rosey"... Avila left this organization in poor shape and Harris will have a lot of work ahead of him fixing it. Individual signings alone (such as Aaron Judge) aren't going to fix it. The standard you alluded to earlier was Dombrowski: it took four years for him to fix this and turn it around. I dont know if it will take that long or not this time, but realistically, it wouldn't matter who the owner or PBO is, it would take at least a couple of years to fix this mess. Expectations, imo, should be set accordingly.

To add to this, it's worth remembering that before Harris took this job, he pulled himself put of consideration one year earlier with the Mets, an org who, despite whatever flaws it may have, has an owner who will spend exorbitant amounts of money on free agents. Put another way, he wouldn't go to work for Steve Cohen but would for Chris Ilitch. Which tells me that he values being given the space to build an organization as he wants to build it. Which Chris, for his part, will do because he seems about as hands-off an owner as they come in MLB.

Alternatively, maybe some of us would prefer to actually see how Harris does over the first couple of years before automatically declaring his tenure a failure. It doesn't require sky box bribes to think that way.