|
Post by digit on Aug 4, 2023 16:26:09 GMT -5
Scrooge McDuck is 1000 times smarter than that. It'd be more like Flintheart Glomgold.
|
|
|
Post by digit on Jul 16, 2023 19:46:44 GMT -5
When one of the 10 best pitchers in the world hits the open market at age 25 without even a QO attached, you go all in for it. The Sox have the financial might AND the payroll flexibility to do it. There’s no excuses in my opinion to not offer him the best deal unless Yamamoto preferred playing elsewhere for less money. It's not like Yamamoto's camp is going to contact Bloom and tell him we're signing with you once we find the highest offer and give you a chance to match. That's not how it works. He will receive multiple offers and contract amount and personal preferences will dictate where he signs but it's not like teams will be sharing their offers with other teams. I was just thinking that the Sox's advantage was having Masataka Yoshida being able to talk to his ex-teammate and getting a general feel for how the bidding was going. Guess that's not too likely, eh?
|
|
|
Post by digit on Feb 17, 2019 12:28:47 GMT -5
It's not that you won't change your mind. It's that you never STFU until you beat everyone into submission when they get to the point that they don't care about the argument anymore. You "win" arguments because people give up talking since it's obvious that you'll got on forever. It gets so old and you're trying to make the accepted views on soxprospects.com to be only your views and no one else's. Maybe you should just go write books where no one argues with you. This. A thousand times. Stopped by to see if things had gotten better with regard to readability. Guess not.
|
|
|
Post by digit on Jun 30, 2017 17:42:04 GMT -5
They have -more- cap room after July 1st because the previous cap room they had didn't roll over. Since they've filled Hill's hold with Rubio, that gives them more room to match any offer for Ingles (Haywood's other 'best running mate') in free agency.
It also, I think, give them more room to absorb, say, a three way trade to get Kevin Love before matchig Hayward.
(Note: Nothing is hard fact here, just my quick take based on what I'm seeing on the Jazz blogs.)
|
|
|
Post by digit on Jun 30, 2017 17:27:23 GMT -5
A quick check just now indicates yes, they have to do this transaction today. 'Rubio is slated to make 14.25 million dollars next season. The Jazz were 16 million under the salary cap, and had to spend it by today or else they would lose that space.' - from www.good4utah.com/sports/utah-jazz-to-trade-for-ricky-rubio/755073612 ) So, they already know Hill is asking for far more than they want to pay so they are doing this now, and will point towards 'we have a replacement, will you consider it'? instead of telling him straight up "We are not signing Hill." If his desire to really play with Hill is a big factor, though, I don't think this helps.
|
|
|
Post by digit on Jun 30, 2017 16:43:31 GMT -5
Utah discussing Rubio with Minny. Could have implications on Hayward since it sounded like Utah doesn't want to pony for Hill. If they can do it by tonight, they can take him into 2016 cap space. Meanwhile, Minny might be trying for a big signing (Butler was supposedly recruiting Lowry) That's pretty damned good news for the Celtics, I think - the odds that Hill will be around lessens the Jazz's chances of re-signing Hayward. At least it's better odds than we had a few days ago. What was it, 44 percent chances?
|
|
|
Post by digit on Jun 20, 2017 15:41:58 GMT -5
I'd trade the #3 and several non-Sixers/Lakers/Kings picks as well as one or two players for Porzingis. Should still be able to sign a FA too, assuming we don't -have- to take on Melo or Noah's contracts. If we do, I'd take some of those extra picks off the board.
|
|
|
Post by digit on May 30, 2017 11:45:44 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by digit on May 23, 2017 12:03:24 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by digit on May 23, 2017 9:59:43 GMT -5
Honestly, I dunno. I'd just keep him and cut Bolden. Bolden strikes me as the kind of guy you can pick up anytime when you need him, because he's pretty much purely a special teamer. A very damned good one, granted, but NE has a lot of UDFAs players who could stand some development time -and- can play special teams.
Right now the way I see the RB picture: Gillislee, Burkhead, White, Lewis, Foster.
The only real reason to ditch him might be that he gets injured too easily, but... eh. If that happens, stick him on the IR, especially with the change to the IR rules.
Actually, has the proposed change to the IR rules been approved? I thought they had the vote on this yesterday.
|
|
|
Post by digit on May 22, 2017 8:55:01 GMT -5
Everything rjp313jr said, plus signing Hayward - I think this is the only chance they will have to sign a max free agent for a long time, and they should take it.
|
|
|
Post by digit on May 19, 2017 14:39:08 GMT -5
In that scenario, wouldn't that have made Marcus Smart the starting point guard?
A Butler/Brown would have been interesting, but I think it wouldn't have happened because Chicago would be demanding still more.
|
|
|
Post by digit on May 19, 2017 8:45:41 GMT -5
After the recent Gisele comments, I'm thinking this -is- gonna be Brady's last year. If she's expressed this publicly, I have to think she's said many things in private similarly to Kraft and Belichick, and while I think Brady passed whatever protocols there is, Belichick is pretty aware, I think, that Gisele is going to push Brady to retire after this year, and that's why he's been holding on to Garoppolo so tightly.
|
|
|
Post by digit on May 19, 2017 8:33:51 GMT -5
Question, would you trade the Memphis pick? I think Memphis is going to play just well enough to retain that pick for a while, but there's a point where it becomes unrestricted.
I wouldn't trade for Butler, not because I don't think he's that good, but because I think we'd be getting maybe two years of his prime, and then be stuck with paying him too much money while he slides down rapidly.
Paul George interests me more, but the price can't be that high on him if he's a true rental. At this point, though, he seems to be more about getting out of Indiana than about playing for the Lakers, so there's always a chance you could sign him if he loves being a Celtic. (Get Paul Pierce and Larry Bird to talk to him about what it's like in Boston...)
|
|
|
Post by digit on May 12, 2017 18:42:54 GMT -5
Possible but I doubt he would sign for what's offered, and he seems like a better fit in Cincinnati or Baltimore somehow.
|
|
|
Post by digit on May 12, 2017 14:22:13 GMT -5
Nice replay of Pats 2004 season on Pats Pulpit website. Seems like yesterday. That puzzled me as I didn't see it there till I realized you were talking about something embedded in one of the articles and not an actual article. Man, that Matt Light catch...
|
|
|
Post by digit on May 12, 2017 10:30:50 GMT -5
TDs are to RBs like saves are to pitchers. Nice, but they don't tell you anything about how -good- they actually are as players.
Discounting the players' all-around skills in favor of "TDS!!!" is something like, well, thinking Joe Borowski with 45 saves in 2007 is a great relief pitcher (seriously, I've heard someone argue that Borowski's 45 saves made him the best reliever in baseball that year)
Honestly, I'm more excited for Burkhead and Gillislee because with them playing, opposing defenses have to be guessing run or pass, since they can run, receive, and pass-block very well (much more effectively than Blount).
Part of the reasons the Patriots did better in the playoffs with Lewis and White against better defenses was because better defenses can stop the run when they know it's coming, and that's exactly what happens when Blount is in there. He just doesn't have the pass-receiving -or- pass-blocking skills to be effective, so defenses could afford to guess that when he was in there, it was time to play the run.
Having two more like Lewis and White will help more in the playoffs, I think, than Blount will. That's not to say Blount's not a horrible RB, but he's just not all -that-.
|
|
|
Post by digit on May 11, 2017 14:33:37 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by digit on May 11, 2017 13:06:21 GMT -5
A. Get ANY guaranteed money from another team B. Even if no guarantee, get a situation where he has a better chance of earning a roster spot. C. He may simply want a bigger role with the way the Patriots have carved up his time and given it to others. Now he's probably more motivated to find a different team because after July his fate is in the Patriots' hands at 1.1 million (and apparently under the terms of last year's contracts, which means 2.1 million -if- he reaches the incentives.)
|
|
|
Post by digit on May 10, 2017 14:39:38 GMT -5
I'd like to know too - I didn't even think you could tender an unrestricted free agent.
Still, that's a pretty clever way of getting a comp pick, and I suspect the reason it's not done more often is because the unrestricted free agent's salary being increased at 110 percent is usually a lot more money than one would want to pay someone who's not signed by the deadline.
|
|
|
Post by digit on May 10, 2017 14:20:51 GMT -5
Yea I think it's fair to say that the Patriots likely would have been happy with or preferred Blount at 1.5m and their 5th rd pick over Gillisley at 4m (this year) and no pick. That however doesn't imply they like Blount the player better than Gillisley the player. I would be shocked if they did. Apparently the Patriots didn't want Blount at 1.5 million. They do, apparently, still want him at 1.1 million. profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2017/05/10/patriots-made-may-9-tender-offer-to-legarrette-blount/Hell of a strange, obscure tender rule.
|
|
|
Post by digit on May 10, 2017 13:59:48 GMT -5
The NFL and the Patriots especially are evolving into more of a 3 safety set with a safety replacing a linebacker. It's why they paid Harmon and it's probably why they are comfortable with their relative lack of LB depth. Although if Hightower goes down for any length of time they may be in some trouble. The Patriots have for some time been trying to do the three-safety set, which is why they've been drafting 2nd round safeties since nearly forever... and I think it's mostly because Belichick, in order to defend his own offense in practice, had been playing with the 'Big Nickel'. Note as far back as 2012: boston.cbslocal.com/2012/05/21/how-bill-belichicks-creative-offensive-system-is-changing-the-nfl/
|
|
|
Post by digit on May 10, 2017 11:51:21 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by digit on May 10, 2017 11:41:22 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by digit on May 10, 2017 8:29:35 GMT -5
You have to remember, some people think he's an elite short-yardage back.
And yet here it is, past the compensatory cutoff date and he -still- isn't signed, meaning he didn't even get the Patriots a comp pick.
|
|