TheLeviathan

The DT whose name I can't remember is a better pro prospect IMO.

Absolutely. Fielding a competent defense will help too. I just want the focus of 2017 to be a stepping stone/turning point season. Not an end on to itself we should be wrecklessly trying to fortify. That approach has a minuscule chance of both short and long term success.

We absolutely should start fixing things. It will just do nothing for 2017. As long as you accept that, fine. But if you aim to fix 2017 you'll be flushing value all offseason.

My wife and I clutch to our Sunday nights of John Oliver, Westworld, Thrones, TWD and carved out time for Fargo and Better Call Saul, but we have to make a determined effort every time. I can quote some Blaze and the Monster Machine episodes almost word for word though. If that has any value. Does it?

It's what I thought, early on, they were doing. And then it veered so badly off the tracks it was hard to believe. It should have been a slow build for Penguin building his criminal element and his role as Gotham's most legitimate mobster. Instead....we got this @^*%-fest.

I will say, I'm going to need more from you "fortune favors the bold" people. So far these are the ideas I've discerned that seem to qualify: Trade Rosario for a pitcher Trade Dozier for....something (you would almost certainly not get an established or even ready young arm for him. You're going to have to aim for near ready) Sign Brett Anderson If that's it, we have very different definitions of "bold", "liberal", "elite", or a variety of other words I've heard tossed around in here.

Good for the Cubs. Tip of the cap to Epstein, he understands value and how to rebuild a team when you have plenty of money to spend.

In this market the return on Ervin Santana will never be higher. Maybe you don't deal him, but you better try. Eventually all teams go through a rebuild. All of them. Every. Single. One. The team that headed to the World Series tonight followed exactly what I am advocating. Exactly it. They didn't sign Grienke or Sanchez or Hamilton or B.J. Upton. They did this. And turned one of those signings into Jake Arrieta. And seriously, citing Casilla and Florimon and Santana is just such a bogus argument. C'mon. What's funny is...I'm not chasing anything. I'm suggesting the exact opposite. The market for what we need couldn't be less ideal. Chasing need at the expense of value and good sense is a doomed strategy. I'd argue your suggestion of tossing prospects at a ridiculous seller's market is the approach chasing something. I'm all for adding arms. But I'm for adding arms that probably aren't ready to turn us into a contender in 2017. (Largely because that goal is ridiculous) I want upside and you won't get that thinking 2017 is anything other than a stepping stone.

They never had an endgame. And then it became "villain cameo of the week" for cheap thrills. The Fish/Penguin storyline was a complete fiasco. And when I check on it they seem to still have that going on?

I thought the flawed planning of Gotham caused it to rapidly descend into absurd stupidity before the end of season 1. It has managed to become a campier, more farcical version of Batman than the glorious Adam West version. Except only one version was actually going for campy and farce and it wasn't Gotham.

I get a couple nights, mostly Sundays for TV adult style. I envy those of you who can watch less Paw Patrol and more South Park.

I don't mind getting creative in finding a capable arm, I'm just being realistic about how that turns out. If Brett Anderson is your definition of "creative" you should probably back down your language about being "liberal" quite a bit. You're spitting in the wind, not being liberal. I'm for some good ol' fashioned wind spitting, I'm just accepting of what it is. The problem, as I see it, is you seem to be totally and utterly ignoring what this offseason looks to be both in terms of what is available and in terms of what we have to acquire anything. Pitching is always at a premium, this offseason it is a barren wasteland that is going to make "premium" look like a bargain. Meaning, if you think you're going to be able to be "creative" getting established talent you are going to pay through the freaking nose to get it. And we don't even have that many assets to do such a plan even if it were available. You seem to be mistaken that I am following some over-arching philosophy here when what I am actually doing is reading the situation for what it is and responding in the way that makes the most sense from a long term probability standpoint. I'm not going to give Brett Anderson three years and 30M this offseason when he'd be lucky to get 1 year for 6M most of the time. I'm not going to trade Dozier for some number 3 starter. Because I see no way (and we can check on this in a few months) that we aren't going to be down right bowled over by what it's going to take to add established pitching talent this offseason. We don't have that kind of value to trade and we aren't in a position to risk what we do have. It's not that I plan on our prospects being great, I'm vocally adamant about patience with prospects. So your characterization of me as liberal on that is just not even remotely true. In fact, that patience is why I take the long term view. We don't know what we have, so why unload a bunch of assets (be a buyer) in a lopsidedly seller's market? That's just a horrible idea for a 100+ loss team. I'd suggest the real problem some of you have is that you have a philosophy about team building that acts more like a club than a scalpel. Must...add...talent.....will work sometimes Frankenstein, but it'll also get you in plenty of trouble. Just like Ryan's strategy of hording his precious prospects like Gollum was an equally poor strategy. My belief is that smart organizations recognize what they are, what they have, what the market is giving them, and work towards the highest probabilities of success. What you're attempting to do - Hulk Smash Talent into Team - is not something I'll ever get on board with. It's not nuanced and well-thought out enough for my liking.

If "do anything for the sake of saying we did something" is your approach, I consider that far more probable to fail in miserable fashion. At some point, being realistic about your situation and the available options to fix it is important. Otherwise you're just a dog chasing cars. So, how about we stop waiting to see what we have when we know what we have is good? It's not like the last few years have been spent on that and that's part of the problem. We largely have been trying to tread water while we were a foot below the surface.

In fairness, I'm considering open revolt with pitchforks and torches counts as "not accepting the results" The nature of the impending revolt might change my success rate....

I totally had it. Just wanted to show some humility and let all of you discover it as it unfolds....

One of my highest hopes with new leadership is that we will be open to participating on this front.

I have to see more of Dunn, but Rubio's injury history makes me lean away from him as the long term guy.

The TV deals need to be shared. Let's start there.

I actually got my son a custom made Baby Bamf doll, so I'm right there with you.

Essex was name dropped in Xmen:Apocalypse and there are rumors that Richard E. Grant is playing the role. It'd make a lot of sense if he is behind X-23. Sinister is also known for employing desposable goons to do his dirty work. I had the same rebellious take on Wolverine. He was the "it" guy, so i steered toward Colossus, Nightcrawler, and Rogue. As for Magneto, I thought it should always break down something like this: 1) Magneto appears on the scene, frustrated with mutant oppression, and does something like they did in Xmen First Class 2) He forms his brotherhood and there is mutant civil war. 3) He tries to form his own civilizations like he did with Asteroid M, Genosha, and the Savage Land. 4) He starts to recruit others and maybe gets manipulated ala Cortez in Fatal Attractions. 5) Xmen Apocalypse - Xavier dies and we see the inner hero in Magneto 6) Magneto joins the X-men and pushes them towards darker decisions I could probably go on, the source material is rich and very poorly tapped into at this point. Hell, i didn't even go down the road of him ripping the metal off Logan's bones or his love affair with Rogue or his children.

A trend we badly need eliminated. You could do 10 movies around Magneto and never get stale. The fact that this franchise has managed to botch most of them is baffling to me.

I thought X-23 as well. An interesting, if poorly used character in the source material. Also interesting that the Reavers didn't have their mechanical component, which I think I like. I'm still interested to see what role Sinister has. Perhaps that's where the cloning comes in? Or, as he's apt to do, splice genes to create a weapon for his own use? I like the idea, but planting Sinister into some future world as an adversary could prove problematic if the movies continue. (Though, as a diehard X-fan, I'd kind of like to see them really and truly rebooted. Even though I love Fassbender's take on Magneto apart from the last movie which I've chosen to strike from my memory)

In life there is no other choice but full throttle? Your argument seems to be something like: "My goal is to be the Senator from MN. Riding this plane to see Disneyland is not full throttle towards my goal. I'm jumping out of this plane because, dammit, full throttle to my goal!" At no point does just basic common sense, realism, and probability come into making choices? Seriously, some of you are using "full throttle", "go for it", "be aggressive" and the name "Brett Anderson" in the same damn thought.

Seems like a mix of Old Man Logan and some of the early stories with Kitty Pryde. I dig it. We know Wolverine will be back with a new actor sometime so this is a good way to see Hugh off. He has been amazing in the role.

The state contributions are waning, but the cost inflation preceded that. Largely due to the enormous amounts of federal money influencing things. I like that we're talking about fixing college debt (it'd be the single smartest economic recovery plan I can imagine), but the problem starts with fixing federal financial aid and holding colleges more accountable for their spending.