chasfh

Yes, please, Angels! And block the Rays' number. 😉

Even if the Cardinals were to magically—by which I mean, while on magic mushrooms—accept a gimpy Skubal plus a wild and inconsistent Lange in exchange for their ten-time Gold Glove-winning and this-year starting All-Star third baseman, I would definitely never want to extend Eduardo for another six or more years, nor give more than 2/20 to the other guy, which I doubt he would accept.

Who are you thinking of here?

It's always a complicated calculus to figure out when to bench a guy, but other things being equal, a rookie hitting .224/.261/.333 is going to get benched a lot quicker than a 30 year-old Gold-Glove All-Star Top-2-MVP veteran hitting the same, if for no other reason than the 30 year-old Gold-Glove All-Star Top-2-MVP veteran is always a bet to turn it around, even after a whole half-year of soft hitting, versus the unknown quantity that is the rookie.

By ... ?

The ironic thing about keeping Javy for four years is that people think we'll end up moving him to second base or third base, but shortstop is exactly the position where a weak bat plays best, and he is still arguably the leading defensive shortstop in the league.

Not just piss off that veteran player, but also all the players around him. Because if it can happen to one, especially a leading veteran, it can happen to all, and practically nobody would choose to be in an environment like that.

He's really been bad since 2017, not just 2021, but if he still gave you joy throughout the contract all the way up to today, then at least we got something positive out of the deal.

People listen to CMo?

You misspelled Mr. I.

Sure he can. Al Avila is hurting us right now, and he'll be hurting us next year, too.

I wonder whether that deal has ever been made?

What would the first scenario look like? I can’t imagine what big-league-ready rotation arms plus bats a contender would give us that would help us contend now, in return a rental of Eduardo and Lorenzen. The second scenario might return something, but I would guess it would have to involve absorbing bad money off some fringe contender’s books. I can’t conjure off the top of my head any names that would qualify. Any ideas? In any event, I don’t think either idea is even on Harris’s radar.

I'm not sure I would want even four years of Eduardo, let alone six, which I assume somebody will give him. But if not, offer him three.

How about Colt Keith? If you’re gonna liquidate hitting prospects, sh*t, man, go all the way! 😅

How do we add hitters without trading prospects? I don’t see it. And how do we justify giving six more years to Eduardo through age 36 and letting Lorenzen walk after the year for nothing, when we still have an entire hitting structure to rebuild? I don’t see that either. I know everyone wants to win NOW, and I’d like to win this year, too, but I would rather take that run with the guys we have after trading Eduardo and Lorenzen and Cisnero and, if we can get something great for them, Lange and/or Foley. I don’t want to start trading guys like Colt Keith and Jace Jung and Wilmer Flores and Ty Madden and Parker Meadows to try and pick up some second division veteran hitter Paul Goldschmidt or Eugenio Suarez or Ryan McMahon. And I’d bet money Scott Harris is selling regardless of how we do in the next week and a half.

Dan Dickerson keeps talking about things like putting together a little win streak to “change the narrative” at the trade deadline. He cannot possibly be talking about trading prospects for middling big leaguers just to likely still fall short of winning the division, can he?

Back to real football … 😁

lol "burned down regularly"

Well, if they can't use that excuse for not going after free agent so-and-so, they can come up with another.

Also legally, enslavers raping the women they enslaved did nothing wrong.

I have seen no evidence that "BLM riots" were caused by "pro-BLM folks", unless you're suggesting as much since the people the media were showing to be acting out that summer were black, so therefore. I would also like to see any evidence that "destroying ... an area within a few blocks of where they live ... also happened in some circumstances". Outside of looting a Target here or there, I don't see whether they destroyed entire areas, which was certainly the implication in that coverage. I didn't see where anyone set fire to their own homes, or to their neighbors' homes, or to anyone's homes for that matter, which is what destroying an area would certainly entail, since people do live in areas. But in the end, who knows, maybe my refusing to take leaps on information I regard as insufficient is a testament to my delusions ...

You know as well as I do that not only do right wingers conflate protests and riots, they believe those kinds of protests are riots. They can't be separated. In fact, you are conflating BLM protests and riots right now. In fact, you're calling them "BLM riots"! Ever see a BLM protest? I saw several, right here in Big Shoulders. Not one that I saw devolved into a riot, even when people were carrying Defund the Police signs right in front of the police. They were marching in a very peaceful and straightforward manner, in broad daylight and along the route the city prepared for them.The looting we saw here after sundown did not arise out of those protests. These were opportunists who saw an opening, and some were proven to be false flag actions. And they weren't "burning down their neighborhoods". All those violent reactions happening on the street were happening downtown, where people of modest means can't afford to live. But right wing media said they were destroying their own neighborhoods because it is in their interests to connect the political movement that is BLM with the lawlessness of individual actors coming together in a place who are purportedly willing to sacrifice the very places they live in order to, I guess, demonstrate what irrational, nhuman scum they are. And that's how right wing media get people hopped up to become responsive to Jason Aldean's message. But please, tell me more about what I personally am content with. I need to learn more about myself.

Some will disagree but I think this is actually a good sign: It's a good sign because they are tacitly acknowledging that he is guilty as hell and the only thing they have left is the threat of civil war to allow the felon Trump to roam free so he can lead his flying monkeys to the next adventure. The really good part is that there is no way this government ever caves to that. Only a Republican would set him free, not because they actually fear civil war so it's for the good of the country, but because they will say they fear civil war so it's for the good of the country.

Here’s what I mean: MLB took over the Padres broadcast earlier this season. Give me this look all day every day.