romeo212000
Self-proclaimed Asshole
Espn blog says the cubs wanted Feldman and some of Texas top prospects for garza. I assume that means any or all of Ramirez, Perez, Olt, Profar etc. I wouldn't give up but one, but not sure which.
Those of you who are opposed to the Rangers going hog wild on salary shouldn't like this at all. I for one think they can spend in the $150-170 world without issue (maybe more eventually), but this just doesn't seem like smart spending.
Darvish looks impressive, so was this what the Rangers were waiting for? If so I still am not sure why it would seem letting your homegrown ace leave to go to your number one competitor in division that already has a stacked rotation in exchange for a bidding crap shoot for an unproven pitcher is the best option.
Those of you who are opposed to the Rangers going hog wild on salary shouldn't like this at all. I for one think they can spend in the $150-170 world without issue (maybe more eventually), but this just doesn't seem like smart spending.
i never said give him 120M, i said give him a competitive offer that matches what the other teams think he's worth. the Angels think he's worth 5 years, 75+M and the Marlins think he's worth 6 years and 90+M. and the Nationals were in it for a long while at around 5 years and 70+M.
how competitive is an offer of 4 years and 60M, compared to those offers?
and how many 16 game winners were there last year? i'll answer for you. there were 17 in the MLB in 2011 and the same number in 2010 and there were a minimum of 150 starters for the 30 teams. so yeah, i think replacing a 16 game winner could be tough
angels /pujols talks ongoing 10 years and at least 210 mil
i hope the rangers arent in all this gio gonzalez talk.......
ANGELS TO SIGN PUJOLS......BEING TWEETED BOOOOOOOOOO