Year one being better doesn't mean year two is bad. They won't be winning any bidding wars next year on Kershaw our other elite talents, the big spenders are under the tax threshold this year for a reason. They are also very unlikely to sign two really good pitchers in any one off season. Passing this year makes next year's work that much harder.
I agree that filling the team with guys you can't option is bad roster management. We've seen it with the bullpen, and other issues, over the years. Napoli makes no sense.
I see no good coming from giving up prospects for one year rentals. Not given their current roster. I also dont get worrying about flexibility if you never spend your money. It is way early to be worried about starting pitching yet, imo.
I know you want new writers, but if you want blogs to get more traffic, start using blogs for more of your own stuff. Seth's prospect posts should be blogs. Also, I hear the technology isn't super modern.
I do. But he is the top free agent. The way to win the bidding is to win the bidding. I am just being realistic here. It's about the money. These posts never once mentioned anyone being cheap. I never implied it either. The point is simple, if you want the most expensive asset, you have to pay up.
Why do people keep saying three years on relief pitcher deals? Haven't nearly all the deals been one or two years? How are we to trust the front office to be great pitching evaluators, if we don't think they are smart enough to find a relief pitcher to sign for more than one year?