2016 MLB Regular-Season Thread

You know you are taking ex's comments a little too literally and personally. The Royals usually beat the White Sox and Twins. They had lots of games against both teams left on the schedule. That's where their hopes at making the playoffs stood. They'd clearly rather play the White Sox than the Yankees, even if they don't quite have a 1.000 winning percentage against them.

 

Money drove the decision. Rather than add at the deadline, they cut payroll. That was about money. Rather than consider keeping an elite closer when he becomes a free agent, they dealt him for youngsters. That was about money.

Two games out and they weakened their team rather than strengthen it at the deadline. You really think that was a baseball decision? Bullshit.

 

Baseball decisions are driven by what is best for the team. Contenders should add help or stand pat at the deadline, not trade away key veterans for unproven players. That the Pirates did the latter was motivated by money, not the desire to put the best possible team on the field.

 

I wonder how apeshit you'd go if you DID care.

 

The Pirates were three games above .500 when they dealt Melancon. Now they are a game under. They have lost nine of 10, and two of those were due to failures by Melancon's replacement.

Also, it wasn't just about trading the closer. It was about failing to add enough veteran help at the deadline. They rolled the dice on Nova and he paid off, but otherwise every move was driven by cutting costs and weakening the major-league roster. This goes all the way back to the offseason.

 

Oh, I care. I don't care if the team succeeds or fails, but I do care about the inferiority of baseball's financial system when compared the NFL and about owners who cheat their fans by always putting the bottom line first.

Also, I like being proven right. I said all along that the Pirates weren't handling this season the way a contender should and the evidence is backing up my claim.

 

Whether to sign him as a free agent and whether to trade him at the deadline are two separate and largely unrelated decisions. You keep making it seem like trading him means they can't sign him in the offseason.

 

The fact you are stupid enough to think you have been proven right is great.

3 games over 500 and should add, they got value for someone they were losing. Smart BASEBALL decision.

 

Counting anything as free in a sport where the best team only wins 60% of the time is stupid. So is expecting a team to continue to play 800 baseball.

 

Two games out of a playoff spot with two months to go and they traded one of their best players away for financial reasons, and they are four games under .500 since the move. The Pirates made the playoffs three years in a row and were expected to contend again. Yet they weakened the team with cost-cutting moves in the offseason and did so again during the season. That you are too clueless to understand my point or too stubborn to admit I'm right doesn't change the fact that the Pirates are proving me to be correct.

 

No, you're missing the point. What I'm saying is his impending free agency motivated the move. If the Pirates had control, say by signing him to an extension, they wouldn't have traded him. They didn't want to risk losing him as a free agent, so the financial situation drove the need to trade him and weaken the team for 2016.

 

Now do the Yankees.