SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Recent Posts
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Mar 9, 2019 13:44:57 GMT -5
Some of it is. Edit: I want to add to this because it's a more serious point than four words of snark expresses. John Henry's money does not fall out of the sky. Specifically to the Red Sox, he makes his money from us. Buying tickets, watching the broadcasts, Red Sox fans are the people who make this a profitable venture. Red Sox fans in turn are not motivated to buy tickets or watch broadcasts to see John Henry's smiling face. No one has a parade for his net worth going up another 3%. So yeah, regardless of the relatively high payroll, fans are absolutely right to be mad at that guy when he refuses to address serious needs (ie the bullpen) because he wants to increase profits some fractional amount. (Oh yeah, and the whole "well all the other big market teams act this way too" thing. Yeah, it's called f'ing collusion! That makes it so much worse. The Red Sox aren't just cheating their own fans, they're helping other teams do the same thing!) Okay some of it is. The small percent that is mine I get a vote -- and vote that he pays $300m for salaries. How far will my vote get me? If you want to get mad have at it. I am not. It's part your money too. I don't feel comfortable telling you how to spend your money. ANd if you feel its collusion if you are a lawyer or expert in this manner in some way and want to start a thread on this subject to then further go for it. I take what people say on these sites with a grain of salt when they speak things like collusion. Yeah but collectively we fund the whole damn thing. There's not a dollar to be made owning the Boston Red Sox without fans buying tickets and watching games. My only real point with this is that there's absolutely nothing unreasonable about complaining about the Red Sox payroll, even as it's the highest in baseball. As far as "collusion", I doubt there is in a legal sense. But they all know what they're doing.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Mar 9, 2019 9:10:11 GMT -5
And as I've said before -- I can spend John Henry's money too. But it’s not my money. I do compare him to other owners and he is spending more. Would I love him to spend more? Sure. Why stop at $275M? Why not spend over $300m? Why should I care he spend $300m? But he is spending more than everyone else. I can't bury my head in the sand on this issue. No one else spends. So OFC I'm going to compare him vs other owners and right now he is spending more. Some of it is. Edit: I want to add to this because it's a more serious point than four words of snark expresses. John Henry's money does not fall out of the sky. Specifically to the Red Sox, he makes his money from us. Buying tickets, watching the broadcasts, Red Sox fans are the people who make this a profitable venture. Red Sox fans in turn are not motivated to buy tickets or watch broadcasts to see John Henry's smiling face. No one has a parade for his net worth going up another 3%. So yeah, regardless of the relatively high payroll, fans are absolutely right to be mad at that guy when he refuses to address serious needs (ie the bullpen) because he wants to increase profits some fractional amount. (Oh yeah, and the whole "well all the other big market teams act this way too" thing. Yeah, it's called f'ing collusion! That makes it so much worse. The Red Sox aren't just cheating their own fans, they're helping other teams do the same thing!)
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Mar 8, 2019 18:35:53 GMT -5
Whatever, if that's the language you speak then how about this: In 2016, when Swihart was last healthy and playing regularly, he had a xwOBA of .336. That is a larger number than .281, right? No reason to think Swihart can't replicate that or something close with regular playing time. Even in Swihart's rookie year, when he was awful the first couple of months, his xwOBA was .286 on the year. Again, larger than .281 and probably his offensive floor when given enough playing time. On the other hand, Vazquez's career high xwOBA is .293. Checking my math, .336 is still larger than .293. Using the numbers you insist are gospel, my takeaway on that is that Vazquez's offensive ceiling is probably less than Swihart's offensive floor. So yeah, I think Swihart has the potential to make up 9 runs in a month let alone a full year. Unless, of course, these 9 defensive runs are hypothetical, metaphorical runs like the "win" in WAR in which case that 9 "runs" can mean whatever it needs to be for you to be correct. Starting to remember why I stopped posting here. Literally all I said was that Vazquez isn't as bad a hitter as he showed last year.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Mar 8, 2019 15:41:29 GMT -5
So far, the list of potential 2B options that have been mentioned is as follows (in decreasing order of likelihood as ballparked by me): - Pedroia
- Holt
- Nunez
- Lin
- Hernandez
- Chavis
Pedroia is at the top because he wouldn't have it any other way. He'd find a way to destroy the SoxProspects server if I didn't have him there. Did I miss anyone?? I hope Lin is ahead of Nunez because I can't stomach any more of Nunez' defense at 2B. I think I'd use him there as often as I'd use Vazquez at 3B or 1B. I was thinking the same thing. I also might put Chavis ahead of Hernandez, Chavis we at least know has a shoulder.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Mar 8, 2019 15:22:15 GMT -5
OK, I'm going to be tough about this. Throwing a bunch of terms around without definitions is your prerogative, but it doesn't really nail down your case. Good for catchers is a very different take than for most of the other positions. The history of MLB is littered with catchers who had 15+ year careers but who were mediocre to very bad hitters. The position is valued differently. All the evidence points to that simple fact over and over again. So throwing around that term means absolutely nothing to me without considering that. We have no idea what data teams are using, but there have been hints over the years about how coveted some catchers are despite their near uselessness at the plate. In a nutshell: Good needs a clear definition and we don't have all the data we need to get a handle on one. How about WAR, is that quantifiable enough? It's plenty quantifiable but as far as catchers go, it isn't very good. Edit: I'm not a fan of WAR in any case and I'm sure it's not perfect, but I doubt it's so far off that the dumpster fire caliber numbers it produces for Vazquez and Leon are so far off that they're completely meaningless. We can use your numbers that you brought up, Leon saves 11.7 runs defensively and as 7th best in baseball has little room to improve. Vazquez is at 9.0 and ditto on upside. How hard do you think it would be for Swihart to close that gap with his bat given a chance? Harder than you think, because Vazquez is a better hitter than he showed last year (.281 xwOBA versus .240 actual wOBA), and Swihart's average defensive numbers are the most likely to slip in a larger sample of playing time.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Mar 7, 2019 18:17:53 GMT -5
So what would you starting point be? Oh, I don't know. How about we start with Swihart's current career OPS against RHP of 0.733? Go look at his current career stats, he's been very impressive against right handed pitching. I'd take Swihart's current stat line over his career 435 PA as our 2019 catching output any day of the week. If he's managed correctly and only plays against RHP and does nothing but maintain the output that he's already produced in major league baseball, he's got to be head and shoulders above even the most wildly optimistic views of Leon/Vazquez offensively. That doesn't even take into account any progression at all from Swihart which he probably has plenty of. Swihart should start against RHP. Leon should start against LHP. Vazquez should buy a plane ticket. This is both sort of reasonable and something I don't think Alex Cora is very likely to do at all. The mere presence of Sandy Leon should tell us that pitcher comfort comes before OPS optimization for him. Also, L/R splits take a super long time to stabilize, and that line against righties comes with a .365 BABIP.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Mar 7, 2019 13:20:06 GMT -5
Could the Sox sign more of their core and throw caution to the wind with the expectation relief will comes soon with a new CBA. We all expect that the new CBA will increase caps considerably as they have turned out to be very restricting given the revenues. It has to at least be considered correct? I would love to see the Sox keep most of this core together. The pessimistic side of this is you don't necessarily want to be pumping up your payroll when you're worried that there could be a protracted work stoppage in the near future.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Mar 7, 2019 13:03:54 GMT -5
Idk if anyone has espn Insider, and has any snippets to share on this, but Raffy Devers seems to be opening some eyes this spring. Certainly has gotten the notice of Cora, and some media folks. www.espn.com/mlb/insider/story/_/id/26141417/expect-monster-year-red-sox-third-baseman-rafael-deverswww.bostonglobe.com/sports/redsox/2019/03/06/rafael-devers-good-place-according-alex-cora/afZ08oGB7nvVutIIasg0SK/story.htmlIt seems like Devers got a little complacent last off-season, which isn’t remotely surprising for a just-21 y/o. To his great credit, he seems to have learned from that mistake right away. Consensus opinions on his last year from prospect hounds seemed to temper early assessments significantly. My hope (and belief) is, he comes back with a vengeance. Expect better range in the field and improved pitch selection. I think Carita is capable of throwing up a .300/30/100 line and inserting himself into the 3 spot. And if not him this year, maybe JBJ does it (wouldn’t THAT be a treat to watch?!). FWIW, I know we all expect some regression from Mookie and JDM, but I don’t think it’s a given it’ll be all that much. And both are certainly capable of even *more*. But even if they DO slip back a bit, Beni, Raffy, Bogey, and JBJ with his new swing (and even new bat/approach “Brock Holt!”) all seem like they could take *significant* leaps forward. Lots to be excited about with this offense, especially with Pedey getting in there at 2b this week. The 30/100 is probably coming sooner or later, but I don't see a .300 hitter with the contact rates he's shown in the big leagues so far. I expect to see some power growth and maybe a better approach, but it's very rare to see players make big jumps in contact rate.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Mar 7, 2019 12:57:12 GMT -5
So what would you starting point be? There isn't one. This is both confusing and not a particularly ringing endorsement of the player.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Mar 7, 2019 11:25:57 GMT -5
Just what the Red Sox didn't need. A thin bullpen just got a lot thinner. And the worst part isn't that he's suspended for 80 games. It's that he's not even eligible for the post-season roster. I mean, it got a lot thinner if you really believed in Steven Wright, which frankly I don't understand why you would...
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Mar 7, 2019 11:24:21 GMT -5
Projections cannot possibly be accurate on a guy that barely ever played in recent seasons if they all of a sudden start playing a lot. So they're pretty much worthless for those kinds of players. They'll just assume that they'll have the same stats as the season before in almost no playing time. Steamer projects him to play 29 games next year even though he played 82 last season. I have no idea how they calculate that. But if he's traded to some rebuilding team, he'd play a lot more than 29 games. If any catcher is traded, he'd play a lot more than that. I don't even think it's a starting point to predict what kind of season he'd have with a lot of playing time.So what would you starting point be?
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Mar 6, 2019 13:07:54 GMT -5
BP's comprehensive catching stats, rate per framing chances (good proxy for innings caught), rank among top 30 catchers in terms of PT: Sandy Leon #2 (14.3 runs per 6K chances, which is equivalent to 120 GS) Christian Vazquez #5 (11.6) Blake Swihart, with 6.9, would be tied for #10 had he qualified. The next four guys are Mike Zunino, Martin Maldonado, Yadier Molina, and Buster Posey. Swihart still projects to be an above-average hitter for a catcher, and likely a top-10 in MLB. I think everyone sees that hit tool. If he's top 10 on both sides of the ball, it's not crazy to say that he should be in the next tier below All-Star candidate if he gets PT, and he has four years of control left. They have to get that in trade value for him. If they do, I'm fine with that. If they can't, I'm fine with Leon for fair value, which should be easier to agree on (although valuing his pitch-calling will make it tougher).
One Swihart solution (which I think has been done in the past, via verbal agreement) is to include a PTBNL where the choice is a function of how the player performs in his first year.
Is this some kind of a gaslighting?
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Mar 6, 2019 12:00:06 GMT -5
This is a relatively unimportant aside, but Ivan Rodriguez catching all the games he did in the Arlington, TX heat is really remarkable. He started 557 games as catcher from 1996 to 1999. Yea I wonder how he body was able to handle that... 💉💉💉 Yeah man I've been hitting the gym really hard lately so I can, uhh... stand up to that summer heat that's coming.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Mar 6, 2019 11:50:48 GMT -5
Thought it was interesting that fitbit measured that catcher as burning 4349 calories per day and they get a $25 per diem for food. I mean, $25 will get you over 85,000 calories worth of crisco from Amazon Fresh, so it's got to be all good, right? (The math is real; the post is a joke; pay the kids.) Yeah but we're mostly just talking about anonymous minor league filler anyway. Why invest anything in those guys? Not like Max Muncy hit 35 home runs last year or anything. (Also it's very good and cool that at his age, it's likely that Muncy will provide his most valuable years to the richest team in baseball essentially for free.)
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Feb 27, 2019 17:38:02 GMT -5
Well, that's rotten. As the resident Swihart nay-sayer... A) I always thought he was a good prospect and I always wanted him to succeed B) that he has not succeeded I think is largely the result of a run of bad luck and possibly bad player dev decisions beyond his control C) you're always glad to be proven wrong on your pessimistic projections, but it would be a particular joy to be made a fool of by Swihart this year.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Feb 27, 2019 16:48:11 GMT -5
Yeah, that's quite possible. And perhaps they're looking more for a 3b than a SS if that's the case. They had interest in Machado and were rumored to want to be in on the Arenado bidding. With Bogaerts, it's just a matter of time before he'll need to shift to 3b. Any team signing him for 7 years will probably have him playing 3b for the last 4 seasons. My eyes tell me that Bogaerts is a good reliable SS with decent, but not great range, but I don't think the defensive metrics think highly of his defense at SS. The metrics disagree with each other. DRS absolutely hates him, but UZR thinks he's fine. I don't think that he's as bad as DRS says, but I also don't really trust my eye to make that call. It's hard to know what the front office's internal metrics say, but the answer will probably determine whether they want to shell out $150 million for him. I hear the Yankees have had some success with a defensively limited shortstop in the past.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Feb 27, 2019 10:19:36 GMT -5
I have feeling there would be serious biomechanical issues with moving the mound back, at least initially. Hard to see how such a radical change requiring different muscle movements would be less than damaging to players who've trained at the existing distance for all of their pro careers. Maaaaaaybe, but I think it depends on how far you have to move it to get the desired effect. If it's six inches or a foot, I don't think it's that much of an adjustment for pitchers; probably just trying to hit a little bit of a tighter target with their breaking stuff. If it's five feet, yeah, I think that could really screw everyone up. Changing the mound hight on the other hand seems way scarier from that perspective, but then again they did it once before and I don't remember any stories about how it broke half the pitchers in the league. Of course, pitching was a much different game back then, guys weren't pitching at max effort nearly as often and probably weren't as locked in on their mechanics either. Long story short, I don't know how any of this stuff would really play out, but moving the mound back a small amount (say six inches) seems like a safe way to start experimenting with this stuff.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Feb 27, 2019 10:03:56 GMT -5
Such a crapshoot, no matter what. Still haven't come up with an accurate model for predicting stock performance on the exchanges after all these years, despite the billions of dollars, or more, spent on trying to forecast stock prices. Article has PECOTA badly missing Red Sox' directional trend in '18, while B-R accurately predicts upward trend for Sox. B-R had Baltimore finishing at .500, and Tampa Bay having an abysmal season, finishing 32 games under .500, while PECOTA was much, much more accurate with it's predictions for Baltimore and TB in '18. I don't know why people think that this is a point worth making. Oh, projections systems don't predict the future with perfect accuracy? Yeah, they don't facilitate time travel or function as perpetual motion machines either.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Feb 26, 2019 14:51:11 GMT -5
Nobody... thinks he's the best player in the league. The best player in the league is Trout. The next best is probably Betts. There's a list of several people who could be third, and Arenado is on it. Not sure if you're disagreeing or agreeing with me because that's pretty much what I said. When I said "close to the best player in the league" that is not saying "he's the best player in the league". He's being paid like he's at least the 3rd best player in the league now even though he's being paid the most. I think he's closer to top 20 than top 3 because of his splits. He's probably going to get the third biggest deal just this offseason. This seems perfectly in line with the market set by Stanton and Machado. If anything it's a bit of a bargain compared to those deals.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Feb 26, 2019 12:16:45 GMT -5
Arenado is so overrated. This is a terrible contract. I would have loved it for the Yankees to decide that was the guy they finally decided to spend money on. If Arenado is worth that much, how much is this guy worth? People said the same thing about Matt Holiday. It's the Coors Field road penalty: plus.fangraphs.com/does-coors-field-make-rockies-batters-worse-on-the-road/Also as to your question about player B, I would certainly be better able to answer the question if you just told me who it was...
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Feb 26, 2019 12:06:24 GMT -5
Everyone who’s evaluated them retrospectively. So you've or somebody else has surveyed everybody who does their own personal predictions to see if the computer programmed evaluations are more accurate than your own internal projections or my own internal projections or everybody else's own individual unshared internal projections? How would that even be knowable? Give me a detailed projection for every player in major league baseball and I'll let you know how you did at the end of the season. It's not a question of projections being better or worse than humans. The whole point is that projections are doing something that humans simply aren't capable of. It's like saying, how do you know there isn't someone out there who can drive nails better with their fists than with a hammer? And to continue the analogy, there's a lot more to building a house than owning a hammer. But if you're going to build one, you should for sure own at least one hammer. If you're going to try to win a World Series or just your fantasy league, you need to do more than just go by the projections, but that's where you start.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Feb 26, 2019 10:07:17 GMT -5
But I've been following prospects for long enough now to know the sad truth, which is that a bad injury at a key developmental stage is what knocks tons of careers off course permanently. This is what I'm skeptical of. I'm not sure there is a formula here meaning his trajectory while no longer considered a star prospect but he could certainly hit better than Leon and he could potentially hit better than Vaz. He did hit better than both last year so why can't he do it again this year?. So his trajectory as a hitter - how can it not be superior to at least Leon even if he no longer is the top prospect of prior years? Also-- I can remember on here reading what a stud defensive player Vaz was. Didn't he get DPOY in the minors? IMO he hasn't come close to living up to that. We have poor grade catchers for all 3 I think. And last year Swihart outhit both. That's what he'll probably do better than Leon and possibly Vaz. Vaz is no lock as a hitter. At this moment neither is Swihart but after two years- even with atrophy -- he hit better than both. SHouldn't there be an expectation (though he is no lock) that he can hit better than what he did last year ? I realize it might not be good enough but it might -- which makes it an unknown, doesn't it? You don't think it's "no shot he can hit much better than Leon and possibly just a little bit better than Vaz?" I feel like were holding it against Swihart that he was hurt but not against Vaz. And we're not holding much against Leon even though I think we have to be pretty certain his bat is downright awful. Last year Leon and Vaz played like "utility" players too, didn't they? So what will Sox be losing of Swihart vs Leon? ANd if Vaz's bat fails -- and we only have Leon - that's pretty assured we'll get nil offensively from the catchers. Potentially wouldn't Swihart "offer" some "hitting protection" if Vaz hitting fails? 1. Vazquez is definitely a better defensive catcher than Swihart. 2. Vazquez has slightly better offensive projections than Swihart, and I believe them, largely because while they were both terrible last year, Vazquez swings and misses at about half the rate that Swihart does. He's clearly much better at putting the ball in play. In with both players, putting the ball in play with some frequency is about the extent of the offensive contribution you can expect. That's a substantial difference in skills, and a major advantage for Vazquez, all injury issues aside. 3. Leon, whatever. I kind of prefer him as the backup just because he's more predictable in what he gives you (a good glove and absolutely nothing else), but if they kept Swihart over him, I'm fine with that too. Keeping all three is ridiculous, though.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Feb 25, 2019 15:30:41 GMT -5
He has a ten year professional track record, and a .256/.314/.364 line in just under 600 MLB plate appearances. The system is fair to him by looking at every single plate appearance he's ever had. And if the track record is thin... I mean, yeah, exactly. That's what they're looking at. You have two catchers, one of them has a statistical track record that suggests they're an above-replacement MLB player, the other one doesn't. It's not complicated. But your point is why sometimes "stats" get questioned. The way you are using them is why we need to sometimes question the validity of stat usage. First off he hasn't had a ten year track record unless you count High School. The 2012 season was year 1 and he basically hasmissed two years in between. Secondly in MLB play Swihart has hit better than Vaz in comparing careers (but those numbers need to be questioned too in terms of relevance. Maybe given more ab's for Vaz he is more like 2017 with a bit more pop.) . Third we see when Vaz got hurt in 2015 the next year he came back his slash was .227/.277/.308/.585. After Swihart basically missed two years (just 81 pa's between 2016 and 2017) it was better than the 1 year Vaz had when he came back. so which stats are the most valid? As jimed said lots of unknowns. Thats why none of our catchers are ranked high -- not just Swihart though. Anyhow, Swihart missed two years less the 81 pa's. IMO its valid to question the validity of the hitting numbers vs Vaz (or Leon.). It seems like there's this sense that the time that Swihart has missed to injuries somehow shouldn't count against him. Like, here was this guy on a promising trajectory and then he got knocked off it when he ran into a wall that he never should have been running towards in the first place, and all the missed time and bad performance since then shouldn't count against him, we should still think of him as the guy he was before all that. But I've been following prospects for long enough now to know the sad truth, which is that a bad injury at a key developmental stage is what knocks tons of careers off course permanently. All the time you can't play, your skills atrophy, and you're still aging. You don't get to be 24 again, but healthy this time. You're just a 25 year old with more work to do and less time to do it in. Plus, we also like to imagine that once an athlete is off the DL, they're healed up good as new, but the reality is that any injury that causes you to miss a significant amount of time probably does have lingering after effects as well. So there's in all likelihood an element of physical degradation as well. All of which is to say, when you suggest that the projections aren't valid because the systems are looking at limited data, that missing time is actually part of what's driving the poor projections. It's part of why the systems don't like him, and it's part of why I don't like him.* I get that he was on a certain trajectory at one point. He's not on it anymore, and he doesn't get a do-over. *As a player for the 2019 Boston Red Sox. If some rebuilding team wants to pick him up on a flyer and really give him some runway to see what the deal is, great, I'd love to see that. But a team trying to repeat as WS champs can't be messing around trying to resurrect broken careers, especially when they don't even like the player enough to ever commit to using him in a consistent way.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Feb 25, 2019 9:45:29 GMT -5
But you haven't countered them. "If people disagree with me then they're wrong, here's my original argument again" isn't helping. If you disagree, that's fine, but that doesn't make you right and someone else wrong, and it's annoying as hell when you just respond to every damn post like that. And for the record, I'm as agnostic as humanly possible about the value of Marwin Gonzalez. I have no dog in this fight. I've never said anyone was wrong or right here. In fact, I don't think I've ever said I was right once on this forum. That's just not who I am, even when I am right. I pointed out articles why it's a crappy deal. Instead, people bash the article. Whatever. That's my counter. Obviously I don't agree with the projections and I think the owners are screwing players like Marwin Gonzalez now. People are defending the bad Gonzalez contract, well I hope they love work stoppages.Shane Victorino doesn't get 3 years 39 million in this market anymore. Honestly dude, you just don't listen to people: Dude is 29 and coming off a 2-win season. Couldn't get a major league deal. This system is dumb. Dude was roughly as good as Marwin Gonzalez, actually... Holt hasn't made it to free agency yet. The market has completely gone to crap. It's just funny that the same people arguing that WAR is worth 7 million and defend it, yet a 3 WAR player on average (whose math adds up to around 21 million for one year according to this logic), is now worth 21 million for 2 years. Don't get it. Add- Heck I'd rather would have rather not wanted Pearce or Holt this off-season, I would have signed Gonzalez if he was going this cheap. Gonzalez is better than both of these players and is making 1 million more this year than Holt and Pearce this year. Or traded Moreland and Holt, then resigned Pearce. Pedro you are getting all hung up on what looks like one outlier career season. He hasn't been a 3 bwar type player for his career and I don't expect him to be one going forward. He got a very good deal in my opinion and I'm just not sure why you think this is an example of the market going to crap. There are a lot better cases. Our former SS having to take a minor league after a 2.2 bwar season is a perfect example of how the market sucks. A solid bullpen arm like Alex Wilson having to take a minor league deal is another one. So much focus is on the top guys, when it's really the lower level guys that are getting screwed. No one on this thread ever said the Marwin Gonzalez deal shows that baseball's economics are healthy. We just think his deal in particular was fair. It's just one contract, it doesn't prove anything about the market as a whole anyway.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Feb 25, 2019 8:46:35 GMT -5
Ah yes, unnamed front office sources. A my favorite source for reliable, measured, not at all insane statements.
Anyway, completely dropping the $/WAR argument once we all pointed out that the contract is perfectly in line with that framework kinda says it all.
|
|
|