|
|
Post by truedodger on Mar 30, 2018 23:41:47 GMT
Makes no sense to give him that kind of money when he has been hurt recently and showing a drop in fastball velocity. Makes no sense to pay the best pitcher in baseball (perhaps the best pitcher in Dodger history), still in his prime, the most money? Hmmm, I totally disagree with that sentiment! Statistically speaking, he is still the best and probably should have won another Cy Young award last season. 31M will be less per season than Machado and Harper get. Absolutely not. This front office is way smart, and I am glad of it. You don't pay for PAST performance and for future performance if you see a past issue with injury or getting up there in age.. Again, recent injuries and velocity drop. |
|
|
|
Post by 88bulldog on Mar 30, 2018 23:44:54 GMT
Makes no sense to pay the best pitcher in baseball (perhaps the best pitcher in Dodger history), still in his prime, the most money? Hmmm, I totally disagree with that sentiment! Statistically speaking, he is still the best and probably should have won another Cy Young award last season. 31M will be less per season than Machado and Harper get. Absolutely not. This front office is way smart, and I am glad of it. You don't pay for PAST performance but for FUTURE potential. Again, recent injuries and velocity drop. What? You pay for future potential? Shouldn't a player have to prove himself first? couldn't disagree more... |
|
|
|
Post by truedodger on Mar 30, 2018 23:51:11 GMT
Absolutely not. This front office is way smart, and I am glad of it. You don't pay for PAST performance but for FUTURE potential. Again, recent injuries and velocity drop. What? You pay for future potential? Shouldn't a player have to prove himself first? couldn't disagree more... No, I misspoke and I will edit my comment. You don't pay for past performance and either for future performance if you see a past issue with injury or getting up there in age. |
|
|
|
Post by 88bulldog on Mar 30, 2018 23:54:39 GMT
What? You pay for future potential? Shouldn't a player have to prove himself first? couldn't disagree more... No, I misspoke and I will edit my comment. You don't pay for past performance and either for future performance if you see a past issue with injury or getting up there in age. Ok so you would pay a guy like Trayce Thompson before his injury because he had "potential". Or a guy like Jharel Cotton fpr instance because he had some "potential". Make pretty much much zero sense. |
|
|
|
Post by truedodger on Mar 31, 2018 0:02:33 GMT
No, I misspoke and I will edit my comment. You don't pay for past performance and either for future performance if you see a past issue with injury or getting up there in age. Ok so you would pay a guy like Trayce Thompson before his injury because he had "potential". Or a guy like Jharel Cotton fpr instance because he had some "potential". Make pretty much much zero sense. This is Clayton Kershaw thread. Not a Trayce or Cotton thread guy. Stay on topic if you can, lol. |
|
|
|
Post by 88bulldog on Mar 31, 2018 1:04:50 GMT
Smh...
|
|
|
|
Post by truedodger on Mar 31, 2018 1:10:20 GMT
Clayton Kershaw thread, GOT IT?!! |
|
|
|
Post by 88bulldog on Mar 31, 2018 1:34:22 GMT
So paying for future potential only applies to Clayton Kershaw.
Got it!!
|
|
|
|
Post by truedodger on Mar 31, 2018 1:52:03 GMT
So paying for future potential only applies to Clayton Kershaw. Got it!! Pretending to be dumb, huh. Maybe not, it's just in your nature to be it, lol. I already clarified that an hour ago. This is a Clayton Kershaw thread not a Trayce or Cotton thread slowww poster. |
|
|
|
Post by Blunashun on Mar 31, 2018 1:59:00 GMT
If this is Jake, we MIGHT be looking for someone to run the Lakers forum here. Ask Ray.
|
|
|
|
Post by 88bulldog on Mar 31, 2018 2:03:10 GMT
So paying for future potential only applies to Clayton Kershaw. Got it!! Pretending to be dumb, huh. Maybe not, it's just in your nature to be it, lol. I already clarified that an hour ago. This is a Clayton Kershaw thread not a Trayce or Cotton thread slowww poster. Awesome. So are you saying we DO NOT pay for future potential for players not named Kershaw? understood. |
|
|
|
Post by truedodger on Mar 31, 2018 2:04:17 GMT
If this is Jake, we MIGHT be looking for someone to run the Lakers forum here. Ask Ray. I am not understanding your post. Are you saying I am that Jake guy? |
|
|
|
Post by truedodger on Mar 31, 2018 2:06:22 GMT
Pretending to be dumb, huh. Maybe not, it's just in your nature to be it, lol. I already clarified that an hour ago. This is a Clayton Kershaw thread not a Trayce or Cotton thread slowww poster. Awesome. So are you saying we DO NOT pay for future potential for players not named Kershaw? understood.t LOL, I guess you DO NOT understand this is a Kershaw thread and not a Trayce or Cotton thread, lol. |
|
|
|
Post by Blunashun on Mar 31, 2018 2:10:08 GMT
It's an offer. Contingent on Ray. Jake trolled. This other guy makes an honest effort to engage in conversation & that was my suggestion.
|
|
|
|
Post by 88bulldog on Mar 31, 2018 2:13:40 GMT
It's an offer. Contingent on Ray. Jake trolled. This other guy makes an honest effort to engage in conversation & that was my suggestion. Really... |
|
