Jason Frasor

[TheLeviathan]

The view that not signing Jason Frasor isn't a big deal equates to "pie-in-the-sky" nonsense?

 

The frustrated viewpoint would have changed if we had signed Frasor? Signing him or not really doesn't change anything, that's the point, it's pretty meh. I'm discouraged as well, with or without Frasor, if they do nothing else I'll be downright depressed.

 

I'm talking about the forum in general. Again, as I said earlier, it's not Frasor, it's what he represents - a player who is arguably better than anyone the Twins signed as a FA going for a low-risk contract while we sit 30% (give or take) down from our payroll last year. So it feeds the view that this offseason has been a complete failure by the very expectations the Twins told us to get behind.

[darin617]

I have just a simple question:

 

in a 99 + 96 loss team that has a 9th (Perkins) and 8th (Burton) inning guy, how much a priority should be a 7th inning guy? Given the 99+96 Ls

 

(in my book, I wouldn't even waste $ extending Burton - he is 31 - trade him. Get the kids to pitch in relief and there are many college power arms coming in the pen from the recent drafts. But Ryan has millions to throw away to the likes of Correia and Burton)

 

So why are they a 96 loss team? Simply put, no starting pitching.

Too bad the Twins never resigned Scott Baker like they were supposed to. He must have backed out because I read it here it was a done deal and then he ends up with the Cubs and look what we have now. A bunch of 5th starters.

[kab21]

I have just a simple question:

 

in a 99 + 96 loss team that has a 9th (Perkins) and 8th (Burton) inning guy, how much a priority should be a 7th inning guy? Given the 99+96 Ls

 

(in my book, I wouldn't even waste $ extending Burton - he is 31 - trade him. Get the kids to pitch in relief and there are many college power arms coming in the pen from the recent drafts. But Ryan has millions to throw away to the likes of Correia and Burton)

 

I'll disagree on the RP'ers. Wasting money is when you start signing mediocre arms for 5M/yr in the bullpen. Getting average bullpen arms for 2M is a great value regardless if you are a rebuilding or competitive team.

 

Burton's trade value is greater on a reasonable 2 yr contract (w/ option) than if he's a pending FA at the deadline. The only way that this is money wasted is if Burton blows out his arm next season.

 

The Frasor equation is even simpler. Frasor (as a Twin) has more trade value than not signing anyone and keeping the money.

 

The kids will have plenty of chances to pitch in the bullpen.

[70charger]

Right but you have to understand every guy like this is going to remind people of the promises laid out before the offseason and cause them to look again at the pitiful collection of "talent" brought in with this much salary room available. You could argue with the trade of Span they essentially took 30M in reduced payroll and spent 14% of it to help a roster that produced one of baseball's worst records.

 

Today I learned:

 

In order to keep TheLeviathan happy, all Terry Ryan has to do is make a public statement to the effect of: "we will only be bringing in ****ty players this offseason." Then, when anything good happens, he'll be thrilled! Because it's really all about the expectations set right?

 

Aim low. You might fail upward.

[TheLeviathan]

Aim low. You might fail upward.

 

Today I learned Talking a big game about high expectations and being "content" landing Correia makes 70Chargers a happy Twins fan.

 

See how that game works? This organization knew fans could see the writing on the wall and, in my opinion, basically lied publicly to keep fan support up. That's worst case, I admit. Best case is that these guys talked a big game and failed to live up to it. Either way I fail to see how this deserves a defense.

[70charger]

Today I learned Talking a big game about high expectations and being "content" landing Correia makes 70Chargers a happy Twins fan.

 

See how that game works?

 

This "game" isn't working well for you actually.

 

See, I have literally never once said I liked the Correia signing or that I was "content." (Seriously. Go look.)

 

On the other hand, you saying that all you really care about is the difference between what Terry Ryan said and what actually happened is all over this thread. And if that's all you care about, I'm afraid we won't see eye to eye here.

 

Observe:

 

I'm talking about the forum in general. Again, as I said earlier, it's not Frasor, it's what he represents - a player who is arguably better than anyone the Twins signed as a FA going for a low-risk contract while we sit 30% (give or take) down from our payroll last year. So it feeds the view that this offseason has been a complete failure by the very expectations the Twins told us to get behind.

 

What I see is a few posters here so aggressively looking to defend the Twins that they are jumping on anyone expressing frustration as if they're canceling their Twins Fan membership cards and stomping down to Target Field with pitchforks in hand. Chill, people can be frustrated and message boards are totally appropriate venue to express it. Lectures like the ones you, Psuedo, and nurse are handing out about it look pretty friggin silly in light of what the organization has said about what it would do this offseason.

 

Right but you have to understand every guy like this is going to remind people of the promises laid out before the offseason and cause them to look again at the pitiful collection of "talent" brought in with this much salary room available. You could argue with the trade of Span they essentially took 30M in reduced payroll and spent 14% of it to help a roster that produced one of baseball's worst records.

 

Now personally, I love what Ryan did in everything but FA contracts. (Genuinely love it!) But a guy like Marcum screams what he was talking about in the handbook and other places. As did a bevy of others. I don't blame people for grumbling. And I think it's silly as hell to lecture people on having disappointed bitterness when the root source of that is an expectation that wasn't created by the fans, but by the organization who couldn't wait to reassure us all that they were mad as hell about losing and not going to take it anymore. And all that big talk landed us was friggin Correia in non-trades.

 

It doesn't have to be Frasor. But this team has publically declared their comfort with being done this offseason. When you see talent like Frasor still out there for reasonable price tags - that is hard to swallow with the amount of budget room left.

 

It doesn't change that with this amount of budget space that they aren't willing to be a little more risk averse. They are playing it way too safely - from choosing Pelfrey over Baker, Correia/Blanton over Marcum/whomever, etc. They have the budget room to take more gambles and they said, pre-offseason, that they were going to be more aggressive. All people are doing is holding their feet the same fight the Twins lit themselves. I don't get the crusaders to defend the Twins from the very expectations they set out. That is 100% ridiculous.

 

Frankly, there is no defense of the FO when they set the expectations and then failed to live up to them. Again, I like what they've done for the most part, but that doesn't mean they are beyond criticism.

 

I mean, damn, TheLeviathan. We get it already! If the front office had only said that they would bring in terrible players, you wouldn't be bitching so much. After all, it's all about expectations, right!?

 

Still want to play this "game"?

[nicksaviking]

Wow, up to four pages in a Jason Frasor thread? Can't wait to see the double digit beauty that will pop up once Marcum signs with another club. Seems like every thread is turning into a "the Twins are cheating the fans, d bag!" vs "they don't have to justify their payroll to you, a hole!" Battle Royale.

 

Looks like at this point, as much effort is being put into discrediting one's opponent than into making one's point. I thought election season was over.

 

In full disclosure, I've taken my fair share of jabs at front office defenders. This is starting to look petty though, sorry for my behavior. I hope others too see how unconstructive this is getting.

[Riverbrian]

Perhaps there should be less strawmen thrown around then. None of those asinine questions were brought up by anyone. They're incredibly stupid, shallow contributions to the conversation.

 

Put Me On Ignore... Do it right now... I find no redeeming qualities in any of your replies and you don't like anything I have to say anyway... Put me on ignore...

 

As a matter of fact... You pretty much **** on everybody around here so I think that quite a few others would appreciate it if you put them on ignore as well.

 

You are an ass of the first degree. Your tired overuse of adverbs like "incredibly" in front your adjectives like "stupid" lack tact and civility and I've read the last one.

 

Is your self esteem problem really that toxic? Yeah... Self esteem... Because no one who actually felt good about themselves would respond like you do!!!

 

 

Don't bother responding... You are on ignore... You'll just be responding for everyone else and 90 percent of the board hates you already.

[jokin]

This "game" isn't working well for you actually.

 

See, I have literally never once said I liked the Correia signing or that I was "content." (Seriously. Go look.)

 

On the other hand, you saying that all you really care about is the difference between what Terry Ryan said and what actually happened is all over this thread. And if that's all you care about, I'm afraid we won't see eye to eye here.

 

Observe:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I mean, damn, TheLeviathan. We get it already! If the front office had only said that they would bring in terrible players, you wouldn't be bitching so much. After all, it's all about expectations, right!?

 

Still want to play this "game"?

 

I'm not sure your side does get it. Splitting hairs against convincing arguments doesn't make the status quo defenders noble, too good to play the game, while attempting to stay above the fray. The Twins offseason is deserving of constructive criticism in an attempt to moving the franchise towards showing more of a pulse in attempting to right the ship. To mix metaphors, your side is the one playing useless word "games" in defense of this moribund enterprise while Rome burns.

[jokin]

The view that not signing Jason Frasor isn't a big deal equates to "pie-in-the-sky" nonsense?

 

The frustrated viewpoint would have changed if we had signed Frasor? Signing him or not really doesn't change anything, it's pretty meh. I'm discouraged as well, with or without Frasor, if they do nothing else I'll be downright depressed.

 

In my best Lloyd Christmas voice:

 

"So you're saying there's still a chance?"

[jokin]

You can't just make up **** up and call it a fact. People will stop taking you seriously if they already haven't.

 

You really don't have any basis for your distinction between cheap and penny-wise--it's just your opinion.

 

And sure, Corriea is a status quo signing, so flame away, but to generalize that the Twins are maintaining the status quo when they just traded two of their CFers that were under team control for years for three legitimate, young pitchers is asinine. You seem ideological predisposed against the Twins.

 

As we speak, I'm losing valuable sleep over the mere possblility that you're threatening to stop taking me seriously, seriously. As if your perjorative-lobbing is a formula for winning arguments. FYI, I did establish the distinction between penny-wise and cheap, have done so in the past and will continue to do so in the future. I consistently advocate for signing quality as a means to upgrade your performance on the field and ultimately through trades for teams in need of marketable talent. You have difficulty in comprehending that, only to admit much of your case was weak just down-thread. The Twins are currently sitting nearly $30M below last season (after cutting by 20% the year previously) and have yet to sign a legitimate flippable talent, meanwhile, they have failed to sigificantly address their woeful holes up the middle or up-and-down the pitching staff with sure options.

 

Regarding the trades. I have been a vocal proponent in support of these moves, only suggesting that more might have been left on the table in the case of Span.

 

 

Your perjoratives continued with my assessment of the risks taken in these 2 trades. Nothing was made up.

 

You say 3 "legitimate" pitchers. I said, in a way apparently "asinine" to you, that the Twins traded 2/3s of their OF for 3 pitchers that still have a lot to prove and in 2 cases, quite a ways to go to say they are "legit". One of whom who has only pitched at Class A and was too old for that level where he dominated. How many dominant pitchers in Class A, who even are age-appropriate, flame out before they hit the Bigs? Quite a significant number, actually. The other minor league pitcher has stumbled at each of his last 2 promotions. He corrected himself in his 2nd trip through high A ball. Let's see what he does in New Britain. So again, you have another pitcher who has only proven mastery to A ball thus far. You've already counted these A-ball chickens before they've hatched.

 

The Twins move these types of guys up slowly, you won't see them in 2013, perhaps they will get a look at some point in 2014, so again, it's 2015 to realistically expect them to make a significant impact in the starting rotation. Meanwhile, Bagger Vance still has question marks given his bad season, move to the AL and injury concern.

 

For the record, I am ideologically predisposed for the powers-that-be in running my favorite team as if it's part of the 21st Century in a newly-minted showcase ballpark, not as a regime that would be just as happy in making a small fortune in contracting the team, blackmail the public into reinflating its value after contraction fell through and then taking the money to produce more bad movies and rap-music.

 

"old nurse and twinsnorth49 like this" Of course you do.

[old nurse]

Wow, up to four pages in a Jason Frasor thread? Can't wait to see the double digit beauty that will pop up once Marcum signs with another club. Seems like every thread is turning into a "the Twins are cheating the fans, d bag!" vs "they don't have to justify their payroll to you, a hole!" Battle Royale.

 

Looks like at this point, as much effort is being put into discrediting one's opponent than into making one's point. I thought election season was over.

 

In full disclosure, I've taken my fair share of jabs at front office defenders. This is starting to look petty though, sorry for my behavior. I hope others too see how unconstructive this is getting.

 

It is not so much defending the front office as it is not being terribly tolerant of baseless claims. Quibbling over which mediocre is better is rather pointless but done anyway. When one commenter gets a little cranky, they are responded to similarly and the whole works goes to hell.

I don't think any fan is terribly excited about the fact the Twins didn't land a real good pitcher so far. There are different thoughts as to why this is so, and little tolerance for accepting anything beyond "my reason".

[TheLeviathan]

I mean, damn, TheLeviathan. We get it already! If the front office had only said that they would bring in terrible players, you wouldn't be bitching so much. After all, it's all about expectations, right!?

 

Still want to play this "game"?

 

So you pull the context out...that's the game? People on this board continue to rip anyone with a negative take on the Twins moves. My point is simple - they have a right to be bitter and negative because all they are doing is holding the team accountable to it's own words. There is no defense for that, none. Frankly, if they had said "we're going to rebuild this offseason" I would have given that a huge thumbs up. That's what they needed to do.

 

I'm only defending the fact that people that are bitter, have plenty of reason to be. They aren't whiny, turncoat Twins fans and shouldn't be treated as such. And moves like this one are going to spark bitterness because people care about the team and every talented player that leaves the market is only salt in the wound that was this offseason.

 

I wouldn't have had to repeat myself 6-7 times if people actually did "get it" - that's the problem.

[old nurse]

A I consistently advocate for signing quality as a means to upgrade your performance on the field and ultimately through trades for teams in need of marketable talent.

 

and have yet to sign a legitimate flippable talent,

 

meanwhile, they have failed to sigificantly address their woeful holes up the middle or up-and-down the pitching staff with sure options.

 

 

"old nurse and twinsnorth49 like this" Of course you do.

 

There is a difference of opinion on what constitutes quality. What you advocate as quality is seen as little difference in what the Twins actually signed.

 

You really think that a player is going to sign a contract with the Twins in hopes of being traded to a team that wouldn't sign them originally? This kind of thinking is why Pseudo's comment about making fecal matter up

[TheLeviathan]

You really think that a player is going to sign a contract with the Twins in hopes of being traded to a team that wouldn't sign them originally? This kind of thinking is why Pseudo's comment about making fecal matter up

 

It isn't uncommon for players to sign with a team they know isn't very good just so they can assure themselves of an opportunity to showcase their abilities. Hell, the entire concept of signing a minor league deal or a 1 year deal is based on that premise. So yes, many players would do that. (One could argue all those years of Dave Hollins and Otis Nixon were premised on exactly that notion and were used effectively to help the team's return to respectability around 200)

 

And I would argue there is still plenty of quality available that far exceeds what we have signed thus far.

[old nurse]

I do not disagree with you on that there is talent out there better than what the Twins have. Probably disagree on the value of that talent.

Players traded in the past were signed to fill holes on the team. Hollins was traded when he was not working out. Roberto Kelly played here a year and a half before he was traded. That is a far different than singing a player in the hopes of trading them. See Miami for what that does for the integrity of the organization.

Otis Nixon left after one year via free agency. Although it was probably as good of year as he ever had anywhere, I don't think the Twins got a draft pick for him. Just for accuracy in claims

 

If signing talent is flipable than the Correia signing can never be bad because you can flip him for a good prospect. (Jab Jab, wink wink. Need a bigger clue that I am throwing it out there just to poke at you?)

[TheLeviathan]

Players traded in the past were signed to fill holes on the team.

 

I fail to see how this helps. Jason Frasor, Shaun Marcum, hell even Michael Bourn, would all "fill holes" on this team. The Twins could sign three relievers and still be filling holes in all likelihood. Your point was that players don't sign to be moved, but players sign short deals for opportunities that they know may result in a trade all the time. That claim was 100% false on your part.

[twinsnorth49]

As we speak, I'm losing valuable sleep over the mere possblility that you're threatening to stop taking me seriously, seriously. As if your perjorative-lobbing is a formula for winning arguments. FYI, I did establish the distinction between penny-wise and cheap, have done so in the past and will continue to do so in the future. I consistently advocate for signing quality as a means to upgrade your performance on the field and ultimately through trades for teams in need of marketable talent. You have difficulty in comprehending that, only to admit much of your case was weak just down-thread. The Twins are currently sitting nearly $30M below last season (after cutting by 20% the year previously) and have yet to sign a legitimate flippable talent, meanwhile, they have failed to sigificantly address their woeful holes up the middle or up-and-down the pitching staff with sure options.

 

Regarding the trades. I have been a vocal proponent in support of these moves, only suggesting that more might have been left on the table in the case of Span.

 

 

Your perjoratives continued with my assessment of the risks taken in these 2 trades. Nothing was made up.

 

You say 3 "legitimate" pitchers. I said, in a way apparently "asinine" to you, that the Twins traded 2/3s of their OF for 3 pitchers that still have a lot to prove and in 2 cases, quite a ways to go to say they are "legit". One of whom who has only pitched at Class A and was too old for that level where he dominated. How many dominant pitchers in Class A, who even are age-appropriate, flame out before they hit the Bigs? Quite a significant number, actually. The other minor league pitcher has stumbled at each of his last 2 promotions. He corrected himself in his 2nd trip through high A ball. Let's see what he does in New Britain. So again, you have another pitcher who has only proven mastery to A ball thus far. You've already counted these A-ball chickens before they've hatched.

 

The Twins move these types of guys up slowly, you won't see them in 2013, perhaps they will get a look at some point in 2014, so again, it's 2015 to realistically expect them to make a significant impact in the starting rotation. Meanwhile, Bagger Vance still has question marks given his bad season, move to the AL and injury concern.

 

For the record, I am ideologically predisposed for the powers-that-be in running my favorite team as if it's part of the 21st Century in a newly-minted showcase ballpark, not as a regime that would be just as happy in making a small fortune in contracting the team, blackmail the public into reinflating its value after contraction fell through and then taking the money to produce more bad movies and rap-music.

 

"old nurse and twinsnorth49 like this" Of course you do.

 

Someone asked me to show them where a diatribe was earlier......exhibit A.

[TheLeviathan]

Someone asked me to show them where a diatribe was earlier......exhibit A.

 

Yeah, now there is one. It's only going to build until games, even meaningless ones, are played. And people are justified to feel that way, even if it annoys you to hear it.

[twinsnorth49]

In my best Lloyd Christmas voice:

 

"So you're saying there's still a chance?"

 

Yeah, it's a bit early for all the vitriol in my view, however slim the chances that things might change. I'll remain hopeful, you can remain cynical, it's your right.

[twinsnorth49]

Yeah, now there is one. It's only going to build until games, even meaningless ones, are played. And people are justified to feel that way, even if it annoys you to hear it.

 

Quite the opposite, it amuses the hell out of me, why do you think I keep coming here? I would have hated to grade college papers for some people around here, the title would have been 500 words.

[TheLeviathan]

Quite the opposite, it amuses the hell out of me, why do you think I keep coming here? I would have hated to grade college papers for some people around here, the title would have been 500 words.

 

Fair enough, in that case others are going to need a thicker skin on this issue.

[old nurse]

I fail to see how this helps. Jason Frasor, Shaun Marcum, hell even Michael Bourn, would all "fill holes" on this team. The Twins could sign three relievers and still be filling holes in all likelihood. Your point was that players don't sign to be moved, but players sign short deals for opportunities that they know may result in a trade all the time. That claim was 100% false on your part.

What player signs saying they really wanted to play for another team? When you make that sort of claim, proof would be nice. Yes player are signed all of the time to short contracts to fill holes. While they all know they can get traded, that is hardly likely their intent for signing a contract. But you are 100% right on everything you sat and everyone else is just an idiot in comparison.

[TheLeviathan]

What player signs saying they really wanted to play for another team? When you make that sort of claim, proof would be nice. Yes player are signed all of the time to short contracts to fill holes. While they all know they can get traded, that is hardly likely their intent for signing a contract. But you are 100% right on everything you sat and everyone else is just an idiot in comparison.

 

I didn't make that claim. No one signs KNOWING they will be traded. But players sign for bad teams for greater opportunity to showcase knowing that there is a strong chance that they may be traded as a trade-off to the opportunity. And I gave you examples. Teams sign them to fill holes, players agree to those deals for the opportunity knowing full well they might be moved.

[old nurse]

I didn't make that claim. No one signs KNOWING they will be traded. But players sign for bad teams for greater opportunity to showcase knowing that there is a strong chance that they may be traded as a trade-off to the opportunity. And I gave you examples. Teams sign them to fill holes, players agree to those deals for the opportunity knowing full well they might be moved.

Dave Hollins was 16 years ago. Otis Nixon was signed and never traded. It was his second to the last as a major league player, last year with a starting role. Again, if it was something that was done regularly you could remember a more recent example of a flipped player, or an incident that actually happened.

[TheLeviathan]

Dave Hollins was 16 years ago. Otis Nixon was signed and never traded. It was his second to the last as a major league player, last year with a starting role. Again, if it was something that was done regularly you could remember a more recent example of a flipped player, or an incident that actually happened.

 

Last year the following players signed short term deals and were dealt: Jonathon Broxton and Paul Maholm all signed smaller deals with bad teams and were flipped by that team sometime during the year. Now, please save yourself some dignity here and don't go with "yeah but those players didn't sign to be traded....bla bla bla" - what they did was sign with bad teams that would guarantee them of an opportunity to showcase themselves in hopes of a bigger contract the next year. Part of that guarantee comes with the potential of being traded because you never signed for stability, you signed for opportunity. No one sits at the table and says "hey...we just want to play you and then trade you"....."Oh, good, I was just using you guys to make money." Both sides go in knowing the risks and rewards. Some players accept the high risk of being dealt if successful in exchange for the greater opportunity to showcase.

[old nurse]

Last year the following players signed short term deals and were dealt: Casey McGahee, Jonathon Broxton, Paul Maholm, Jeremy Guthrie, and Jonathan Sanchez all signed smaller deals with bad teams and were flipped by that team sometime during the year. Now, please save yourself some dignity here and don't go with "yeah but those players didn't sign to be traded....bla bla bla" - what they did was sign with bad teams that would guarantee them of an opportunity to showcase themselves in hopes of a bigger contract the next year. Part of that guarantee comes with the potential of being traded because you never signed for stability, you signed for opportunity. No one sits at the table and says "hey...we just want to play you and then trade you"....."Oh, good, I was just using you guys to make money." Both sides go in knowing the risks and rewards. Some players accept the high risk of being dealt if successful in exchange for the greater opportunity to showcase.

Sanchez was not eligible to be a free agent last year. He was obtained by KC from the Giants. McGehee was not a free agent signed and traded, he was initially dealt to Pittsburg., Jeremy Guthrie was not signed as free agent from Baltimore, he was traded to Colorado. So 3/5 wrong.

 

Broxton signed with KC after having an injury plagued season. Broxton netted KC 2 "C" prospects. Twins version of Broxton would be Pelfrey. Maholm toiled as a mediocre pitcher in Pittsburg. Once escaped, he put together a good season. The Twins version of Maholm would be Correia. The Twins are doing as you would like them to. You should consider yourself wise as to what the Twins are really trying to do. You should be the happiest person in the world that these players were signed and singing their praises.

[TheLeviathan]

So 3/5 wrong.

 

Yup, I was going from memory on my phone, when I fact checked I edited. Broxton did not net two "c" prospects (though, why does it matter, the Royals turned a one year deal into long-term potential, which is the whole point you were rejecting), he landed two players that had been ranked in the Red's top 10 prior to the year. Maholm and Correia are not similar in anything but the position they play.

 

Even still, because you seem to have forgotten your initial errant comment, the point is players do sign contracts when there is a high degree of likelihood that they will be dealt. They accept that trade-off for an opportunity (like closing in Broxton's case and a rotation spot for Maholm). It isn't that hard, you're arguing something patently false.

[old nurse]

Yup, I was going from memory on my phone, when I fact checked I edited. Broxton did not net two "c" prospects (though, why does it matter, the Royals turned a one year deal into long-term potential, which is the whole point you were rejecting), he landed two players that had been ranked in the Red's top 10 prior to the year. Maholm and Correia are not similar in anything but the position they play.

 

Even still, because you seem to have forgotten your initial errant comment, the point is players do sign contracts when there is a high degree of likelihood that they will be dealt. They accept that trade-off for an opportunity (like closing in Broxton's case and a rotation spot for Maholm). It isn't that hard, you're arguing something patently false.

 

But you are arguing that signing almost anyone to a contract is worth something. Broxton had value to establish as a closer. Frasor does not have that value. He was not primary set up guy for the closer. To sign someone to use as a chip for prospects is hardly practical. If you overbid the Rangers by a significant amount to get him, kept him for a half a year, you would be buying a low level prospect for 1/4 million. (Assuming Frasor would have replaced a minimum wage scrub the Twins have a few of). As a way to get talent, that gets expensive. Broxton was a 4 mil contract. That gets to be expensive prospects you are buying.

[TheLeviathan]

As a way to get talent, that gets expensive. Broxton was a 4 mil contract. That gets to be expensive prospects you are buying.

 

Well, at least we've moved on from that foolish assertion you made initially. Not all of these contracts are worth it and Frasor is not anything special, but 2Mish money is a drop in the bucket when you're looking at a 25M reduction in big league payroll. At this point you're looking at 25M flushed into the owners pockets or 2M gambled (at whatever odds, you may be right that they aren't great odds) on helping the future. I don't see how anyone can argue that they, as a fan, don't prefer the gamble. And it's perfectly ok, given the amount of available salary, for fans to be pissed that we aren't taking those gambles.

 

I know personally, as someone who has given literally given over a thousand dollars to this team over the course of TF's existence (as a season ticket holder and dedicated consumer of Kramarczuk's brats) I've paid more than my share to be pissed at the ownership pocketing money after campaigning hard after the season to keep all of us by promising major changes. (I can assure you, as a season ticket holder, that they were just short of harassment in how much they pleaded with me not to cancel) So this smug campaign you and others are on to silence frustration is pretty damn irritating.