Kinda tired of the revisionist history on this site as people complain

[GREEDY]

No complaining about moves that didn't work out.  10-4.

Found Stone's burner. 

 

[reiks12]

1 hour ago, Balta1701 said:

Tepera has a 4.26 ERA this year, his walk rate is 66% higher than last year and his k rate is about 40% lower so far. Only looks good compared to Kelly.

Take out his one bad appearance against the Rangers (5 earned runs) and hes having a good year, low 2 ERA

[Chicago White Sox]

1 hour ago, Jerksticks said:

Some guys are just nervous guys.  They look to blame when things go wrong and also look for credit when things go right.  
 

These are awful traits in adult males.   And when a bunch of them come together and form a mob of nervous guys…well then the heads must roll!  Guillotines!

 

i think this has been going on for centuries, but I get that it’s particularly offensive in the modern era of reading it online.  
 

Hang in there brother

Weird take from a weird dude

[soulfly]

5 hours ago, CentralChamps21 said:

I haven't seen one person suggest that Grandal was a bad signing. You appear to be reading criticism of Grandal as criticism of his signing

 

On 8/20/2020 at 10:56 PM, soulfly said:

The reality was, we never should have signed Grandal.  I'm not saying he sucks, or will be bad based on his handful of games here.  What I'm saying is, he was a signing from a shitty GM who struck out on other options and had money to spend it, so he spent it.   Catcher wasn't a position of need for us to go and sign anyone.  Going in to this year, you roll with McCann and Collins and see what you have in both.  That money to Grandal should have been spent on pitching.  I'd rather have saved the money this year, see what McCann and Collins provided and reassess next off season.  Then if you needed a catcher, go after one, or go after another need, like right field.

Nah, there were at least a few of us who were against it.  I still say we should have spent the money on pitching, even with knowing how those other two options turned out.  And hey, look, we still need a right fielder.

[hankchifan]

5 hours ago, 35thstreetswarm said:

I agree 90% is high for a percentage in favor of the Kimbrel signing, but it was a clear majority.  Bullpen was widely regarded as the top need at the time.  I remember coming in and expressing a pretty muted note of criticism of the high price we paid, and getting hammered by posters demanding that I identify which high-end reliever was available at a better price.

Don’t count me in the 90%.  I was against the Kimbrel trade from day 1,  as we already had a closer, and had more glaring needs for RF to use those resources for.  It was hard to put up with the likes of Goodwin for a full season.

 

[caulfield12]

4 hours ago, ptatc said:

That's fine but would you not have drafted him because TA was at short?

He’s equally well suited to play 2B and any of the OF positions, though.  Which is kind of Jack’s point about positional flexibility.