- Thread starter
- #321
But noone is a stud when the M’s have them. All 3 SS’s they had in Miller, Taylor and Marte were better after being dealt.I mean Taylor wasn't a stud when we had him, but to give him away was pure dumb.
true which then asks the question did the GM's blow those trades? We see the traded players as they turned out for other teams and not what they were or what they would have continued being if they stayed.But noone is a stud when the M’s have them. All 3 SS’s they had in Miller, Taylor and Marte were better after being dealt.
That’s the hard part to see what they would’ve been. Is coaching that bad in Seattle? I know there is complaints about the park, but the offense has been a top 10 offense plenty of times while the park has been open.true which then asks the question did the GM's blow those trades? We see the traded players as they turned out for other teams and not what they were or what they would have continued being if they stayed.
They sent him to Tacoma and brought up the 12.75 ERA man.![]()
I agree you have to ask the coaching/development question when judging these deals after the fact.That’s the hard part to see what they would’ve been. Is coaching that bad in Seattle? I know there is complaints about the park, but the offense has been a top 10 offense plenty of times while the park has been open.
Mostly bad coaching. After Lou the only 2 good managers we had were Grover and Bob Melvin.That’s the hard part to see what they would’ve been. Is coaching that bad in Seattle? I know there is complaints about the park, but the offense has been a top 10 offense plenty of times while the park has been open.