Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Thursday, August 10, 2017

Getting the Tigers a Real Prospect for Justin Verlander

Nobody claimed Verlander. It suggests no team is willing to just eat his remaining contract. On MLB Network, Ken Rosenthal just suggested the Tigers want top prospects *and* don’t want to assume a big part of his salary. If it’s true, the Tigers are living in a fantasy world and aren’t placing a real-world value in today’s MLB. Verlander will ride down with the Tigers’ sinking ship.

More reasonably, I’d think maybe the Tigers would be willing to pay something like half of Verlander’s remaining contract, getting him down to 2+/$32M. At that price, he’d pretty clearly be under market value, especially when you consider his value to a team who could use him down the stretch, which disappears if they hold him until this winter. So if the Tigers were willing to pay half the freight, I’d think they could land a solid back-end Top 100 type and some filler, enough to legitimately say they didn’t just move Verlander in a salary dump to lower payroll at the expense of the team’s talent base.

Jim Furtado Posted: August 10, 2017 at 11:21 AM | 46 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: astros, justin verlander, tigers

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

   1. fra paolo Posted: August 10, 2017 at 11:58 AM (#5510459)
I'm sick and tired of the Tigers-phobia peddled by Mr Furtado in his intros.

Justin Verlander is still a major-league quality pitcher, with 15 quality starts out of 24 attempts this season. That compares well with the #1 starters on almost all the playoff contenders. Any team with two years or so of playoff-season potential would do well to consider him. He has an established record as a good post-season pitcher, and can still manage to dial-it-up in late innings.

The justification for trading him is that he is one of the best assets they have to exchange for improvements in problem areas. Foremost of these is the barren cupboard of prospects. It's just not in the Tigers' interest to pay his salary (thereby not reducing their payroll) nor to trade him away for the not much more than the kind of haul they got for JD Martinez.

To my mind, I don't want to trade him. He is not a problem. The disastrous move the Tigers made was signing V-Mart and J-Zimm and, only in luxury tax terms, signing Upton. (The V-Mart problem was especially foreseeable, and should have been avoided.) Talk of trading Verlander is a consequence of those deals.

If people don't want to pay fair value, don't trade him. Simples!
   2. jmurph Posted: August 10, 2017 at 12:17 PM (#5510469)
I think the thing is, even if he's relatively fairly paid (and I'm not sure those next couple of years will project that way), teams probably don't want to give up a ton of future value for the privilege of properly paying someone.
   3. madvillain Posted: August 10, 2017 at 12:18 PM (#5510471)
Jim's intro was fair. Verlander is a depreciating asset on a dead end team. Holding onto him doesn't make much sense in this context.
   4. Nasty Nate Posted: August 10, 2017 at 12:18 PM (#5510472)
Justin Verlander is still a major-league quality pitcher, with 15 quality starts out of 24 attempts this season. That compares well with the #1 starters on almost all the playoff contenders.
C'mon...
   5. madvillain Posted: August 10, 2017 at 12:41 PM (#5510487)
C'mon...


To be fair to fra paolo the end of something can be overly sentimental and I've had plenty of Tigers fans describe JV almost exactly that way to me in conversations: "he's still a workhouse", or "he'll dial it up when it counts in the playoffs". The Tigers had a good run but the run is over and they'd do well to just move on from as many aging, declining, highly paid vets as they can, Verlander included.
   6. Tim D Posted: August 10, 2017 at 01:18 PM (#5510556)
There will not be much of interest on the field for we Tiger fans the next couple of years. Watching Verlander move up the franchise record list will be one. If trading him doesn't net a "star" potential prospect, there is virtually no reason to move him. They aren't going to pay down $40M to get a decent prospect and watch Verlander pitch in the WS for the Astros, Yankees, Cubs, Red Sox....

And a trade like that would probably spark a fan revolt that would cost Avila his job. If the Astros want to take most of the salary and offer Tucker fine. If not, they can watch Charlie Morton start a critical game in the Series, being sure to remind their long-suffering, never won a Championship fanbase how much money they saved.
   7. madvillain Posted: August 10, 2017 at 01:22 PM (#5510559)
They aren't going to pay down $40M to get a decent prospect and watch Verlander pitch in the WS for the Astros, Yankees, Cubs, Red Sox....


Which is dumb.
   8. Nasty Nate Posted: August 10, 2017 at 01:28 PM (#5510563)
I only speak for myself, but if my team runs away with the division and makes the world series, I'd be happy with them, no matter the payroll and even if Charlie Morton starts a WS game or 2.
   9. Tim D Posted: August 10, 2017 at 01:30 PM (#5510565)
"Which is dumb."

It may not be optimal and it may delay a return to competitiveness by a year. But if Verlander sets franchise records for wins (probably not but he has a shot in 4 years if they keep him that long), strikeouts, pitcher WAR, IP and games started, among others, a lot of fans would make that trade. After all, it's about entertainment. From a marketing standpoint a Verlander (or Miggy) "dump" would be a disaster. And their TV deal is up for renewal after 2018. There is a lot more involved than $$$ per WAR.
   10. Tim D Posted: August 10, 2017 at 01:36 PM (#5510571)
"if my team runs away with the division and makes the world series, I'd be happy with them...."

And if the window closes and that's the closest they ever got? And Tucker turns out to be good but not great? Really, what have the Astros done for their fans? They drafted well and put a sh!tty product on the field for years, raking in gobs on money, and now that they are on the cusp they can't even make a stretch for a solid SP? Quintana, Darvish, Verlander, any number of guys would make sense. If I am an Astros fan I am a bit peeved.
   11. Nasty Nate Posted: August 10, 2017 at 01:38 PM (#5510575)

It may not be optimal and it may delay a return to competitiveness by a year. But if Verlander sets franchise records for wins (probably not but he has a shot in 4 years if they keep him that long), strikeouts, pitcher WAR, IP and games started, among others, a lot of fans would make that trade. After all, it's about entertainment. From a marketing standpoint a Verlander (or Miggy) "dump" would be a disaster. And their TV deal is up for renewal after 2018. There is a lot more involved than $$$ per WAR.
Given all that, it's surprising that the Tigers have (apparently) been engaging in trade discussions. I guess you listen in case some team bowls you over, but if he is so much more valuable to them then to another team due to all the things you mention, why bother talking to other teams if it's almost impossible that someone would both take on all the salary and give up a good asset?
And if the window closes and that's the closest they ever got?
I'd be happy they won a pennant. That's much better than having a huge payroll and not being good. They're a .625 team, it would be strange to be suddenly pissed at the team now.
   12. RobDeer Posted: August 10, 2017 at 01:43 PM (#5510580)
Verlander is 10th in the AL in quality start%

He allowed only 1 hit over 8 IP in his last start. He was 2nd in the Cy Young in 2016.
If other teams don't value him highly, the Tigers shouldn't trade.
   13. Tim D Posted: August 10, 2017 at 01:46 PM (#5510585)
They're a .625 team for 2/3 of a season, which no one will ever remember if they don't win something more than the AL West. I wouldn't be pissed, I'd be peeved, there's a difference. Pissed would be in 5 years. Five years from now all anyone is going to remember about these terrific Washington teams is that they shut down Strasburg for the playoffs.
   14. Tim D Posted: August 10, 2017 at 01:50 PM (#5510587)
They are listening to trade discussions precisely because he is not only a good pitcher but also a marketing asset, which means he should bring more in return. IF Detroit could get a top prospect PLUS salary relief, it's worth doing. If Houston had acquired him on July 31 no one would have even noticed the Darvish trade.
   15. Nasty Nate Posted: August 10, 2017 at 01:52 PM (#5510589)
I like watching my team win. I root for the Red Sox and last season was much better than 2016 even though they got immediately swept out of the playoffs, regardless of what people will supposedly remember or not remember in five years.
   16. Tim D Posted: August 10, 2017 at 01:55 PM (#5510599)
Easier to say after you got the Curse of the Bambino off your back three times over.... If it was still going on and the Cubs beat you to it last year, there would be blood in the streets of Boston.
   17. Jose is an Absurd Doubles Machine Posted: August 10, 2017 at 01:57 PM (#5510602)
I root for the Red Sox and last season was much better than 2016


Been dropped on your head lately or just riding around in the TARDIS?

I agree with your points throughout though. Failing in the playoffs doesn't ruin a season for me and I always feel bad for people who can't enjoy the little successes along the way.
   18. Tim D Posted: August 10, 2017 at 02:04 PM (#5510614)
I enjoy seeing really good players. JV is a blast to watch. I feel bad for people who think MLB is all about winning and not the sheer pleasure of watching the best players play the best game regardless of result.
   19. Jose is an Absurd Doubles Machine Posted: August 10, 2017 at 02:08 PM (#5510624)
I enjoy seeing really good players. JV is a blast to watch. I feel bad for people who think MLB is all about winning and not the sheer pleasure of watching the best players play the best game regardless of result.


I couldn't agree more. It's one of the reasons I hate the "blow it up" mindset. That's so fantasy league to me. I'm biased as a season ticket holder but even if my team isn't good I want to see good players.
   20. Lest we forget Posted: August 10, 2017 at 03:03 PM (#5510696)
Let's see:

IN THE AMERICAN LEAGUE:

- 11th in WAR, pitchers
- 6th in K's
- 22nd in WHIP
- 2nd in games started, AL
- 6th in IP, AL

Last three starts: 21 IP, 12 hits, 2 earned runs, 22 K's, 6 walks

Good Lord, for the here and now crowd, Verlander as a 2nd or 3rd starter in the rotation would be YUGE.
   21. LA Podcasting Hombre of Anaheim Posted: August 10, 2017 at 04:40 PM (#5510781)
Last three starts: 21 IP, 12 hits, 2 earned runs, 22 K's, 6 walks
Last 7 starts:
47 innings, 32 hits, 10 ERs, 50 Ks, 16 walks. 1.91 ERA, opponent slash line of .187/.258/.327. Sure, he's getting older, but given his excellence the previous two seasons, it's safe to say he's aging very gracefully. People are sleeping on just how good Verlander still is and how much he can help a contender right now.
   22. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: August 10, 2017 at 04:48 PM (#5510790)
I'm not remotely convinced the Tigers can't be playoff contenders next year with this roster, a couple young guy breakthroughs, and a decent manager. They should have been this year, though Cabrera's obviously bad back and JD Martinez's injury put a damper on things.

They've underachieved badly the past three years because Ausmus is a dope; I don't necessarily confuse that with any "window closing" or "wrong place on the success cycle" nonsense.

   23. Cowboy Popup Posted: August 10, 2017 at 04:56 PM (#5510799)
If not, they can watch Charlie Morton start a critical game in the Series, being sure to remind their long-suffering, never won a Championship fanbase how much money they saved.

I only speak for myself, but if my team runs away with the division and makes the world series, I'd be happy with them, no matter the payroll and even if Charlie Morton starts a WS game or 2.

What's wrong with Charlie Morton? He's been pretty good this year. Dude's throwing 95 and K'ing nearly ten guys per nine. I've watched him pitch a few times, his stuff is legit. Sure looks like a guy I want starting for my club in the playoffs.
   24. Tim D Posted: August 10, 2017 at 05:05 PM (#5510807)
How many thousand guys have pitched for three months well above their established level only to flame out? Morton is striking out three more batters per 9 over 95 IP versus the other 900 IP in his career. Want to bet which guy shows up to start game 4 against the Red Sox in Fenway?
   25. Tim D Posted: August 10, 2017 at 05:07 PM (#5510808)
FWIW this Tiger fan is very convinced they will suck for the foreseeable future, even if John McGraw or Earl Weaver are raised from the dead to manage them.
   26. Cowboy Popup Posted: August 10, 2017 at 05:15 PM (#5510812)
How many thousand guys have pitched for three months well above their established level only to flame out? Morton is striking out three more batters per 9 over 95 IP versus the other 900 IP in his career. Want to bet which guy shows up to start game 4 against the Red Sox in Fenway?


He's also throwing a lot harder than he did for most of those 900 IP. I don't know why he's throwing 95 instead of 91-92, but I don't see any reason to believe he's going to stop throwing that hard when the calendar turns to October. His swinging strike numbers would place him in the MLB top 30 if he had enough IP to qualify and his peripherals back up his performance to date (moreso than Verlander). As long as he's got the velocity he has right now, I don't think there's much reason to think he's the same guy he was in 2010-2015.

I'm not saying Verlander wouldn't help, I'm just surprised to see people dismissing Morton out of hand as if he's the same old pitcher.

I'll admit I have a bit of a soft spot/blind spot on Morton, his random mid-career velocity jump made me an instant fan. Usually a multi-year vet breaks through because of better command or a new pitch. Morton just learned to throw harder, and is kind of wild to boot. Not a common story.
   27. Jose is an Absurd Doubles Machine Posted: August 10, 2017 at 05:20 PM (#5510819)
I haven't seen Morton pitch this year so take this with a grain of salt but I'm skeptical of just about everyone's radar readings right now. It seems like there has been a bump around the league and I recall reading something earlier in the year about the new system driving MPH up a bit (I think on the order of 1-2 MPH). He's been very good and may continue to be very good but the radar readings aren't going to convince me (a fact I'm sure will send you weeping into the arms of a loved one).
   28. LA Podcasting Hombre of Anaheim Posted: August 10, 2017 at 05:29 PM (#5510828)
I'm not saying Verlander wouldn't help, I'm just surprised to see people dismissing Morton out of hand as if he's the same old pitcher.
It's not that people are hating on Ground Chuck, but Verlander's a borderline Hall of Famer. High-end Verlander is better than high-end Morton, and especially given recent outings (not to mention recent seasons), you're more likely to see high-end Verlander than high-end Morton. Given how elusive playoff appearances are (especially for the Astros!) maximizing opportunities as they come ought to be more important than waiting for some questionable future payoff.
   29. Cowboy Popup Posted: August 10, 2017 at 05:33 PM (#5510830)
I haven't seen Morton pitch this year so take this with a grain of salt but I'm skeptical of just about everyone's radar readings right now.

I have, I recommend it. I don't know what he looked like before this year, but hitters are having trouble with his stuff. His fastball sure look like it has solid movement and good velocity. Even if some of the bump is a mirage, there are still the much stronger K and swinging strike numbers.

For reference, his velocity on Fangraphs is .1 MPH lower than Verlander's. So one way or another, the two are bringing the same level of heat.
   30. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: August 10, 2017 at 05:33 PM (#5510831)
I agree with your points throughout though. Failing in the playoffs doesn't ruin a season for me and I always feel bad for people who can't enjoy the little successes along the way.

I think that depends on how you fail. If the 1998 Yankees had gotten bounced in the first or 2nd round round, that would absolutely have ruined the season for me. 2004 would have been a better season if the Yankees had won 63 games. I extracted no joy from the 2015 Yankees 1 and done "playoff" experience. If they had won 3 fewer games and missed the play-in game, I'd feel exactly the same about the season.

But if you're an ordinary playoff team, and win a round, that's a good season. A pennant win is always a good season.
   31. Cowboy Popup Posted: August 10, 2017 at 05:36 PM (#5510835)
It's not that people are hating on Ground Chuck, but Verlander's a borderline Hall of Famer. High-end Verlander is better than high-end Morton, and especially given recent outings (not to mention recent seasons), you're more likely to see high-end Verlander than high-end Morton. Given how elusive playoff appearances are (especially for the Astros!) maximizing opportunities as they come ought to be more important than waiting for some questionable future payoff.


I certainly agree that both is better than just one and that Verlander seems to be hitting his stride and brings significant upside to the table.
   32. DJS, the Digital Dandy Posted: August 10, 2017 at 06:27 PM (#5510858)
The Tigers already have their worst attendance since 2005 with Verlander. I can't imagine how low their attendance will fall without Verlander's famous record chase to catch Hooks Dauss and George Mullin in five years.

The Phillies only got what they got for Cole Hamels because they picked up just under $10 million of the $80 million or so remaining of the Hamels contract and the $10 million or so of Matt Harrison that insurance wouldn't cover. Does anyone think the Phillies would be better off with Cole Hamels helping them win 65 instead of 62 games? I doubt anybody in a baseball front office in 2017 actually sees the Tigers as holding the cards here, certainly not any of the people I've talked to.

Houston would like Verlander, but they don't see themselves as *needing* him.
   33. Nose army. Beef diaper? (CoB) Posted: August 10, 2017 at 06:40 PM (#5510871)
I haven't seen Morton pitch this year so take this with a grain of salt but I'm skeptical of just about everyone's radar readings right now. It seems like there has been a bump around the league and I recall reading something earlier in the year about the new system driving MPH up a bit (I think on the order of 1-2 MPH).


Everybody's radar gun readings are up this year because the readings are now taken as the ball leaves the pitcher's hand and not between the mound and home as they were taken previously.
   34. Cowboy Popup Posted: August 10, 2017 at 07:05 PM (#5510878)
Everybody's radar gun readings are up this year because the readings are now taken as the ball leaves the pitcher's hand and not between the mound and home as they were taken previously.


Just to really hammer home my point, Morton's average velocity (95.1) would be tied for 12th among starters with more than 90 IP. I think it's safe to say that Morton's velocity jump is more than whatever the league wide bump is.
   35. Walt Davis Posted: August 10, 2017 at 07:40 PM (#5510908)
Velocity jump or not, Morton's got just a 104 ERA+ and the highest HR/9 rate of his career and a BABIP 30 points below his career average.

On Verlander ... OK, he's 11th in pitcher WAR in the AL. I'm pretty sure he's also #2 in pitcher salary in the AL. That's the problem. As Jim correctly notes in the intro, no team was willing to run the risk of being stuck with Verlander's salary for the next two years even without giving up talent. The Tigers have no choice but to eat substantial salary to get anything back. That might be an unfair evaluation of Verlander's 2017-19 talent level but 29 ML teams have demonstrated that's where they value him.

Meanwhile most of the contenders either didn't need to upgrade their SP (Bos, Cle, Nats, AZ, CO) or they did (Cubs, Dodgers, Yanks) or they are one of the 6 AL teams struggling to stay above 500 and win the 2nd WC (Ms if the season ended today). Maybe the Astros will panic in Aug but whatever leverage the Tigers had before the deadline in playing teams off one another is gone. At this point, they might as well wait until the offseason.
   36. RobDeer Posted: August 10, 2017 at 08:16 PM (#5510936)
Tigers weren't going to let a team acquire Verlander for free from waivers.

If someone claimed him then failed to offer enough to persuade the Tigers to trade, the Tigers could retaliate in the future by making frivolous claims on that team's revocable waivers.

Consider that Bryce Harper passed through revocable waivers a short while ago for the "no one claimed him because they're scared of the contract" logic. Also this article
   37. Cowboy Popup Posted: August 10, 2017 at 08:39 PM (#5510955)
the highest HR/9 rate of his career and a BABIP 30 points below his career average.

And which one of those is the fluke and which is the one you expect to continue?
   38. stevegamer Posted: August 10, 2017 at 10:54 PM (#5511046)
Teams with a very cheap salary structure in place for the next 2 years should've been all over Verlander on waivers, even if they aren't contenders now. I would have liked the Phillies to claim him, as he's essentially a significantly better version of Hellickson for a bit longer term.
   39. cmd600 Posted: August 11, 2017 at 03:26 AM (#5511098)
Consider that Bryce Harper passed through revocable waivers a short while ago for the "no one claimed him because they're scared of the contract" logic


Surely I am misreading, and this is not an argument that teams were scared to pay Harper what he's currently getting? Harper or guys like him might get through waivers because everyone knows the Nationals will pull him back. No one would actually pass on getting him on his contract if the offer was real. At least 25 teams would pass on getting Verlander and his contract.

I see a lot of arguments for Verlander in here that he's still pretty good. That's not the issue. At $28M, his four win or so pace represents no surplus value.
   40. Greg Pope Posted: August 11, 2017 at 09:45 AM (#5511144)
Also this article

Yeah, but that article is specifically addressing the gentleman's agreement regarding roster manipulation. I get that a team wouldn't claim a guy just to mess with another team. But what if you actually want the player?

   41. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: August 11, 2017 at 10:12 AM (#5511160)
What's wrong with Charlie Morton? He's been pretty good this year. Dude's throwing 95 and K'ing nearly ten guys per nine. I've watched him pitch a few times, his stuff is legit. Sure looks like a guy I want starting for my club in the playoffs.


Exactly. I don't think it's at all clear that the current version of Verlander represents an upgrade on a guy with a better ERA, WHIP, and K rate.
   42. Wahoo Sam Posted: August 11, 2017 at 04:29 PM (#5511508)
Oh, the small sample size hypocrisy. The statheads here continually argue that sample size is very important, but then when a Verlander pitches poorly for a month or two, he's suddenly overpriced crap. If you were paying attention (and few of you must have been) JV had a similar pattern in 2016 and got red-hot for three months, nearly winning the Cy Young (which he deserved). Ah, but that's ancient history, right?

Way too many of you hang your expertise on a few knee-jerk reactions to 15 starts or so. Of course, it's easy to say someone is "done" when he's struggling, not so easy to admit that life has nuance.
   43. Wahoo Sam Posted: August 11, 2017 at 04:32 PM (#5511510)
Exactly. I don't think it's at all clear that the current version of Verlander represents an upgrade on a guy with a better ERA, WHIP, and K rate.


That's only true if the games are played on a video screen or in a computer. These players have flesh and blood and freckles. They have varying degrees of experience and abilities to adjust and handle the pressures of being a high-priced professional athlete. Verlander has been there, done that. That means something. It doesn't fit in your spreadsheet, but (surprise!) other people factor it.
   44. cmd600 Posted: August 11, 2017 at 06:12 PM (#5511562)
Verlander has been there, done that


If Verlander can just use that experience to turn it on, why didn't he do that in the first half, before the Tigers season went kablooie? If anything, the narrative on Verlander this year should be that he can't handle it unless the pressure of playing for a pennant is already over. Or maybe just that these stupid narratives built after the fact are completely useless.
   45. Walt Davis Posted: August 11, 2017 at 08:17 PM (#5511612)
what if you actually want the player?

More relevantly, you claim a good player being passed through waivers to block him from a team ahead of you, whether you intend to make a "serious" offer for him or not. You don't take that risk with Verlander because of his contract value.

then when a Verlander pitches poorly for a month or two, he's suddenly overpriced crap

you're misrepresenting the argument. Verlander is an overpriced good pitcher who is about to turn 35. Why should a team give up significant talent for the right to pay a pitcher market value or above? If the Tigers want to eat $20 M or so, turning Verlander into a good, aging pitcher on a 2/$36 contract then we can start talking. Or if the Tigers are willing to trade him for nothing while paying nothing, maybe I'd consider it if I was the Astros.

That means something. It doesn't fit in your spreadsheet, but (surprise!) other people factor it.

Obviously 29 GMs do not consider it a big enough factor to pay the Tigers' price. They've been shopping him for a month. Yet those of us arguing that a pitcher of Verlander's age, quality and experience is not worth a good prospect and 2/$56 are the ones out of touch?

The Astros may yet panic and change their minds -- player comments and a sweep by the White Sox can't be very comforting.

Also there's absolutely no reason that can't be added to the spreadsheet and the models. You seem to be an expert who is able to measure such things so share, the nerds will add it in and then you'll be able to brag about your genius and get a mega-contract from some team's FO.
   46. Fancy Crazy Town Banana Pants Handle Posted: August 12, 2017 at 12:34 AM (#5511784)
Oh, the small sample size hypocrisy. The statheads here continually argue that sample size is very important, but then when a Verlander pitches poorly for a month or two, he's suddenly overpriced crap.

2013-2017: 930.1 IP; 112 ERA+

Four and a half years is not a small sample size. He is what he is now. A good, but not great pitcher, who is paid like a superstar. There is no reason to think you are getting superstar Verlander if you trade for him. And in his mid-thirties, the trend should only be expected to go in one direction.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
aleskel
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogOTP 16 October 2017: Sorry, Yankee fans: Trump’s claim that he can ensure victory simply isn’t true
(465 - 1:04pm, Oct 17)
Last: There are no words... (Met Fan Charlie)

NewsblogNick Cafardo: Brian Cashman and the Yankees followed the Red Sox’ blueprint — and may have done it better
(59 - 1:01pm, Oct 17)
Last: ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick

NewsblogEXPANSION COULD TRIGGER REALIGNMENT, LONGER POSTSEASON
(88 - 12:56pm, Oct 17)
Last: PreservedFish

NewsblogOT: New Season August 2017 Soccer Thread
(1112 - 12:50pm, Oct 17)
Last: Jefferson Manship (Dan Lee)

NewsblogThe Cubs could really use 2016 Javier Baez right about now - Chicago Cubs Blog- ESPN
(24 - 12:48pm, Oct 17)
Last: Covfefe

NewsblogAstros' Lance McCullers will start Game 4 of ALCS - Houston Chronicle
(18 - 12:45pm, Oct 17)
Last: Nasty Nate

NewsblogOT - 2017 NFL thread
(136 - 12:42pm, Oct 17)
Last: Ray (RDP)

NewsblogfrJohn Manuel - Leaves BA and Joins the Twins Organization
(9 - 12:32pm, Oct 17)
Last: fra paolo

NewsblogOT - NBA 2017-2018 Tip-off Thread
(201 - 12:31pm, Oct 17)
Last: Booey

NewsblogPerrotto: Managerial Rumors and Rumblings
(11 - 11:53am, Oct 17)
Last: Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant

NewsblogScandal surrounding the Atlanta Braves is creating more questions | The Telegraph
(23 - 11:49am, Oct 17)
Last: Rickey! the first of his name

NewsblogFrazier's three-run homer | MLB.com (video)
(3 - 11:42am, Oct 17)
Last: catomi01

NewsblogALCS Game 3: The mistake pitch that led to the Aaron Judge of old for one at-bat
(4 - 11:37am, Oct 17)
Last: ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 10-17-2017
(2 - 11:04am, Oct 17)
Last: There are no words... (Met Fan Charlie)

Gonfalon CubsFive minute Los Angeles Dodgers Preview
(46 - 8:57am, Oct 17)
Last: Andere Richtingen

Page rendered in 1.2120 seconds
65 querie(s) executed