Offseason roster thread 2014

[glory]

I don't understand why people are so caught up on Lind's 'platoon-mate'. If the rest of the bench is strong, it isn't an issue. If you have a Gentry/Denorfia type, you plug them into LF vs. lefties and let Melky (if he's here) DH. Hardly a waste of a roster spot.

 

That would be the ideal situation (Lind's platoon partner being a good defensive OF or IF). I don't think JMJ fits that description though. JMJ can only hit LHP and can't play defense. He's Lind that can hit lefties.

[BTS]

I have tried reaching out to Moogy. I've tried to have genuine dialogue with him and I've given him credit at multiple turns both directly to him and in conversations with other people. That being said I eventually reached the conclusion that there's not much point in taking him more seriously than he takes himself. He's just a guy who thinks he's funny. There's just doesn't seem to be much more to it. If there is, I certainly haven't found it and I grew tired of trying. Now I borrow from his playbook and call him logic challenged, etc. It doesn't really make a difference in the end. Moogy gonna Moogy. I have never ever on this board or the other found a poster that it was harder to have a genuine exchange with. He just seems to be in it to entertain himself.

 

He says that he's not arguing that Lind defensive limitations cancel out his offensive contributions but he still maintains that Lind and his offensive contribution should be dumped because of his defensive limitations. It's basically an untenable position but he'll continue to argue it until he's blue in the face because again, Moogy gonna Moogy. He insists that he's not trolling so what are we supposed to conclude instead? I guess that he's a pretty smart guy who isn't content to be merely smart. He needs to be SMARTER even if it actually makes him look DUMBER.

 

Yeah, that's about where I got with him. I wanted to be able to have discourse with him, because he does know a fair bit, but he's just so miserable a person that it isn't worth it.

[Abomination]

Seeing how the Rogers media puppets (Wilner) are already hyping up Pillar as a solid LF option, I think I know where this is going as far as 2015 payroll. Goins/Izturis at 2B, Gose in CF, Pillar in LF against RHP. Pillar switches to CF and Valencia and Mayberry replace Gose and Lind against LHP. That's entirely what I'm expecting for next season. The defense will be great, but the offense horrid.

 

I don't believe so. AA dropped a lot of hints about his priorities being at least one outfielder, and either a 2nd baseman or 3rd baseman. The last time he hint dropped about something like this (bullpen)...

[KingKat]

Yeah, that's about where I got with him. I wanted to be able to have discourse with him, because he does know a fair bit, but he's just so miserable a person that it isn't worth it.

 

I don't even think he's miserable. I just think he's an odd duck whose idead of communication seems limited to either mockery and/or antagonism. There are some pretty abbrasive posters on this board but usually if you sent them an olive branch you can actually have some kind of exchange, not agreement necessarily but at least a non aggressive, non mocking, exchange of ideas. Moogy doesn't march to that beat. There's no point in being nice to him. He doesn't care. Seems to even dislike that.

[G-Snarls]

I'd be fine with Mayberry being his platoon partner. You just can't find players who hit righties the way Lind does for 6.5 mil. If the jays bought him out, the Yankees would have him signed for way more than 6.5 million in a matter of minutes after the free agency period hit.

 

Tampa or Oakland would take him for 6.5M in a heartbeat

 

But yeah that short porch...

[KingKat]

Did you bother to read what I was replying to? It was all personal insults and attacks on my intelligence.

 

Isn't that the type of discussion you enjoy? If you're trying to create other kinds of dialogue, you have a funny way of going about it.

[saskjayfan]

Did you bother to read what I was replying to? It was all personal insults and attacks on my intelligence.

 

we should all just hug it out

[burlingtonbandit]

So why exactly was Graveman added to the 40 man?

[G-Snarls]

Moogy: A bit of you is a good thing. A lot of you is not.

[KingKat]

Please don't try to hide behind "he made me do it" or "you really want this" excuses.

 

The reality of the situation is that I spoke, substantively, to your commentary in a previous post. You responded back off point, and personally attacking. I tried to explain it to you, giving you back what you gave to me, but you insisted on not listening to the correct interpretation and reiterated your lack of understanding. Essentially, while talking about how Lind would be quality value, you mentioned a potential trade option. I simply stated that it wasn't likely to be much of an option. I did not speak to the rest of your commentary. Yet, you responded back as if I had tried to misinterpret your post and attack the whole of it with that commentary. Which was, to the literate, an obvious falsehood.

 

Then, apparently because you were still hurt by being exposed in the last exchange, you went and did the same thing ... this time leading off with the personal insults ... but AGAIN doing so by misrepresenting what I have said. I have said that the ceiling on his production value, combined with the entirety of his other issues (defensive limitations, injuries, handedness limitations) on a proper roster construction made him a bad financial play, given the Jays' situation. You claim that I said his defensive limitations cancel out his offensive production. There's no way you can honestly think your summation accurately represents my stance, unless you are legitimately stupid. So, you're either legitimately stupid, or intentionally misrepresenting what I say, with accompanying personal attacks.

 

There's absolutely no high road for you to take here. You have been the problem, and you have been the one representing himself in an unintelligent manner.

 

If you can't handle yourself whilst talking to me, perhaps you shouldn't try? And you DEFINITELY shouldn't try to place blame on me for your actions.

 

Well maybe I'm stupid then because I'm trying as best as I can to respond to your actual position whatever that is. As I understand it your position is that Lind is not worth keeping at the salary he's making and that the Jays would be better off spending money to cut ties with him? Is that wrong? If that's not what you believe then feel free to enlighten me.

[RealAccountant]

Moogy: A bit of you is a good thing. A lot of you is not.

 

Lol word

[GD]

paging Smedley Butler

[GD]

Absolutely, I agree with that.

 

Pigs are flying

[KingKat]

See? I knew we would eventually come to an agreement.

 

 

 

Absolutely, I agree with that. But that is not what you stated before, when you were speaking to the underlying reasoning behind why it is not a smart move to keep him, which I explained. For what is probably the 4th or 5th time now in this thread.

 

The underlying reason is that his lack of defensive value cancels out whatever positive value he brings. Is that not the logical implication of everything you've said?

[KingKat]

No. Now you had to go and ruin everything. We could have gone out on a high note.

 

Birds were singing, swans were swimming, king was having grown men grab his balls, eastcoastjaysfan and gd were playing with sick Sandler and then you went and crushed everyone's dreams.

 

Seriously, you're being a complete and total such and such. Because I, again, very clearly laid out your misrepresentation, and then stated my actual position, just a couple posts back, when you again were going cuckoo. You even subsequently quoted it. Here it is again. "I have said that the ceiling on his production value, combined with the entirety of his other issues (defensive limitations, injuries, handedness limitations) on a proper roster construction made him a bad financial play, given the Jays' situation. You claim that I said his defensive limitations cancel out his offensive production. There's no way you can honestly think your summation accurately represents my stance, unless you are legitimately stupid."

 

If you honestly can't read that very clear distinction which I expressed for you ... yet again (and again and again) and understand the very clear distinction that exists, I will have the authorities restrain you for your own, and everyone else's protection. You guys have cops on horses up there, don't you? So it may take a while for them to gallop toward you, but rest assured ... they're a comin'.

 

You're distinction is purely rhetorical. I'm giving you the logical implications of your position and you're refusing to add 2 + 2 together. You're putting a value on Lind's defensive limitations even if you don't state it quite like that and you're saying that the negative value of that limitation justifies paying money to dump him. That's your position.

[RealAccountant]

Burly on the radio mentions that they were told, that if they were in it at the deadline, money would be spent.

[KingKat]

My distinctions are entirely substantive. Not only is there no implication that the entirety of his offensive value is cancelled out, but my reasoning extends far beyond his defensive limitations, as clearly laid out in the aforementioned post.

 

So, at this point, kindly go f*** yourself. Real hard.

 

O.K. Here's my revised and corrected statement for you:

 

You're putting a value on Lind's defensive limitations, injury history and handedness value and you're saying that the negative value of those limitations justifies paying money to dump him. That's your position.

[RealAccountant]

From that interview the entire deadline situation was real. Rogers did not want to spend money at the deadline and add Prado.

[RealAccountant]

We already know this. It's old news. The point is they didn't sign anyone because AA didn't favor the trades not because there was financial restrictions (or so it goes).

 

Also, what the f*** is a burly?

 

We did not know that they were specifically told

[burlingtonbandit]

This is my opinion but i think there is truth to it. Rogers let them add payroll but only on the actual deadline day. A week before the deadline there wasn't money available. This would prove Bob Eliott was correct based on the timing of his article. Also could be why they didn't trade for Headley or McCarthy which I thought was a huge mistake.

 

The trades on the actual deadline day did not make sense player wise but they had time before that day to make a deal..And they didn't.

[KingKat]

My statement, as written, is what I conveyed, and what I meant to convey. Your interpretation of it is of no value in light of having the actual, original statement, which needs no interpretation or reframing in order to convey its intended meaning, right in front of us.

 

You are clearly, and only, trolling.

 

There's no such thing is logic. There is only Moogy's rethoric. This is always what it boils down to in the end.

[glory]

The Valencia trade did not add payroll. Kratz and Hendriks made more than Valencia alone. The Mayberry deal added salary but that may have been a combination of Esmil's salary being claimed by the Yankees with whatever else they saved (Deck trade, etc).

 

Rogers did not add payroll beyond whatever it was in the off-season. The players have every right to be disappointed, especially when they were passing a collection plate around to sign Santana in the off-season.

[KingKat]

There's no such thing is logic? What?

 

Do you honestly not recognize a typo when you see one or are you just putting me on?

 

 

And, one last thing ... your characterization of the buyout ... "paying money to dump him" is nothing but inflammatory nonsense ... they're contractually obligated to pay him at least that amount, regardless of what transpires ... and what decisions they make. It's a sunk cost at this point. It is not an actionable, meaningful decision point. The correct framing is simply whether or not they will incur the additional $7.5M to retain his services for next year. That's it.

 

 

That's fair but it doesn't really help your position much. You're still saying they should flat out give up a controlled assett because of certain limitations. Among those limitations you list handedness and injuries. Both of those are reflected in his decreased playing time and accounted for in his WAR. The only thing missing would be the impact he has on overall roster flexibility. That's the part that would supposedly offset his otherwise positive dollar/WAR.

[KingKat]

I honestly don't know what you mean without the typo, unless you're just continuing to be more of a disingenuous dick.

 

I've often accused you of beign disingenuous and you've made a pretty compelling argument in the past that I shouldn't assume that. It's not really a fair way of conducting an argument anyways. My apologies for doing it again. I should have taken your quote at face value and assumed that you did not recognize the typo for what it was and that you actually didn't understand what I said. You're good with language and you seem to struggle to mentally correct other people's mistakes. That can come off pretty dickish but maybe that's just the way your mind works. I'll just agree to give you the benefit of the doubt. I'm a terrible spell checker and ultimately that's on me not you.

[z3r0s]

I've often accused you of beign disingenuous and you've made a pretty compelling argument in the past that I shouldn't assume that. It's not really a fair way of conducting an argument anyways. My apologies for doing it again. I should have taken your quote at face value and assumed that you did not recognize the typo for what it was and that you actually didn't understand what I said. You're good with language and you seem to struggle to mentally correct other people's mistakes. That can come off pretty dickish but maybe that's just the way your mind works. I'll just agree to give you the benefit of the doubt. I'm a terrible spell checker and ultimately that's on me not you.

 

lol Kat, i can't believe you have actually spent this much time communicating with Moogy.

 

good on you sir.

[KingKat]

lol Kat, i can't believe you have actually spent this much time communicating with Moogy.

 

good on you sir.

 

Well once I fall down the rabbitt hole, I try to see it through.

[z3r0s]

Well once I fall down the rabbitt hole, I try to see it through.

 

well he seems to have tired with you and has moved on to making fun of Gibbers with the usually security guard insults.

[Abomination]

Moogy: A bit of you is a good thing. A lot of you is not.

 

You have the power to make a lot into a bit!

[z3r0s]

So is he really a security guard? Or was, or whatever? I've only read bits and pieces of a broken story on this board, and didn't have the "pleasure" of experiencing it firsthand.

 

KingKat seems like he might be an OK, normal guy when he's not on this board (and I'd be willing to drink him under the table watching Lind ruin the Jays) ... But that other guy ... Yikes ... He seems like he's plotting an "event."

 

Gibbers is a good guy, lots of baseball experience. Wouldn't call him a saber guy. He used to freak out on people on the old boards (which was very amusing) and people he deems as casual fans. Some douche got him in trouble for doing it at work which I gather was a government job or something like that. I don't know the details and never wanted to know the details of his personal business.

 

most important point is that he is good citizen on the board.

[Jimcanuck]

So is he really a security guard? Or was, or whatever? I've only read bits and pieces of a broken story on this board, and didn't have the "pleasure" of experiencing it firsthand.

 

KingKat seems like he might be an OK, normal guy when he's not on this board (and I'd be willing to drink him under the table watching Lind ruin the Jays) ... But that other guy ... Yikes ... He seems like he's plotting an "event."

 

What does it matter about the personal lives of those on this board or whether Kingkat seems like an OK, normal guy.

 

Stick to baseball, don't get personal.