why? Explain why it is a good idea to keep a bad player on the roster. You are paying the same money, is it better to keep running out a below replacement level player, and pay him, or cut him, and pay him, and put out a good player?
I fail to see how just cutting Hunter and Mauer is a bad idea at this point. I fail to see how going with young guys with upside is waving a white flag. Running out terrible veterans "because" is waving the flag. This is what happens when you straddle the fence, and refuse to either go for winning or trading off the present FULLY for the future. The rotation is 80% (plus Nolasco and May, not in the rotation, but also) traded for or FA......why does anyone trust this FO at this point?
This from today's BA chat: Jaypers413 (IL): Thanks for the chat, Matt. Do you think what the Rays got back in return for Jepsen qualifies as a steal? (i.e. Tapia & Hu) Matt Eddy: IMO just freeing up payroll and a 25-man roster spot would have been a winning return for a mediocre, 30-year-old reliever. Instead, the Rays got a command-oriented starter prospect (Chih-Wei Hu) and a raw-armed wild card (Aleix Tapia) whose floor appears to be Kevin Jepsen.
I guess it clears up 3B for their new 30 year old rookie 3B also....... I still like this for CLE. Cut costs in the future (by taking on extra money this year), so you can sign players if you want. And, a 2 for 1 on bad deals......
You choose to make those actions "jerky". There is literally nothing inherently, in their very existence, that makes them "jerky". It is all on you deciding they are jerky. 100%, your decision inside your head. I have no problem throwing inside, I have tons of problems intentionally hitting someone.