John Lackey's Blazing Horse House Inferno

[Quality Start Machine]

Chuck has been owned online.

I've come around to Verlander too. Candelario is never getting any time to play unless Kris Bryant dies in a Red Bull stunt gone horribly wrong. I'd rather see what Verlander has left than watch Lackey reliably suck, too.

All bets are off if they can land a Sonny Gray or even a Yu Darvish but that's looking extremely unlikely.

Yeah in my mind they aren't acquiring Verlander to be Justin Verlander^TM they are acquiring him to be a better version of John Lackey. I would still hope they'd go out in the offseason and chase a guy like Darvish, but with the prospects they have left Verlander might bet he best guy left that can help this year and also hold down a spot next year.

I'm sorry, but are you guys soberly discussing dealing Candelario to replace a 5th starter with 10 more starts this year who wouldn't even project to be in the playoff  rotation?  Am I missing something here?  I'm not even that attached to Candelario and I have my doubts that he's anything more than AAAA but you still don't just throw a guy like that away, which is what you'd be doing for 10 Verlander starts to ensure a division that would be won with Lackey--unless you're talking about Verlander replacing Arrieta which, okay if it's worth it I guess go ahead but otherwise I think your collective hatred of Lackey is really driving some of you guys to Stupidville.

Verlander is under control for more than just this year, IDITO. He's signed through 2019 with a 2020 vesting option.

He's a replacement for Lackey starting now through 2019 and that's probably what Candelario is worth. Not just ten starts.

The Cubs are looking for another starter under control. The fact that 40% of next year's rotation (Hendricks, Montgomery) will make bupkus makes the 20 mildo for Verlander easier to absorb.

A rotation of Lester/Quintana/Hendricks/Verlander/Montgomery should get them into October a couple times. There's nobody in Iowa who can step in, and even in AA nobody's exactly setting the world on fire. So the Cubs will need to go outside the organization for starting pitching the next couple years.

[SKO]

Chuck has been owned online.

I've come around to Verlander too. Candelario is never getting any time to play unless Kris Bryant dies in a Red Bull stunt gone horribly wrong. I'd rather see what Verlander has left than watch Lackey reliably suck, too.

All bets are off if they can land a Sonny Gray or even a Yu Darvish but that's looking extremely unlikely.

Yeah in my mind they aren't acquiring Verlander to be Justin Verlander^TM they are acquiring him to be a better version of John Lackey. I would still hope they'd go out in the offseason and chase a guy like Darvish, but with the prospects they have left Verlander might bet he best guy left that can help this year and also hold down a spot next year.

I'm sorry, but are you guys soberly discussing dealing Candelario to replace a 5th starter with 10 more starts this year who wouldn't even project to be in the playoff  rotation?  Am I missing something here?  I'm not even that attached to Candelario and I have my doubts that he's anything more than AAAA but you still don't just throw a guy like that away, which is what you'd be doing for 10 Verlander starts to ensure a division that would be won with Lackey--unless you're talking about Verlander replacing Arrieta which, okay if it's worth it I guess go ahead but otherwise I think your collective hatred of Lackey is really driving some of you guys to Stupidville.

Verlander is under control for more than just this year, IDITO. He's signed through 2019 with a 2020 vesting option.

He's a replacement for Lackey starting now through 2019 and that's probably what Candelario is worth. Not just ten starts.

The Cubs are looking for another starter under control. The fact that 40% of next year's rotation (Hendricks, Montgomery) will make bupkus makes the 20 mildo for Verlander easier to absorb.

A rotation of Lester/Quintana/Hendricks/Verlander/Montgomery should get them into October a couple times. There's nobody in Iowa who can step in, and even in AA nobody's exactly setting the world on fire. So the Cubs will need to go outside the organization for starting pitching the next couple years.

Yep, again, gonna do the math for IDITOS like Huard:

Lackey/Arrieta/Montero 2017: 45 million

I am gonna guess whoever the backup catcher is next year will make no more than about 5 million, tops, and even that is probably an overstatement if they roll with Caratini. Assume Quintana replaces Jake as your #2, Verlander replaces Lackey as your 5 (who could potentially slot into the playoff rotation if his couple of starts and the fact that he hit 98 mph the other night indicate he's regaining last year's form).  Total cost of those guys in 2018:

Quintana (8.9 mil)/Verlander (28 Mil)/Rando Backup Catcher (5 Mil): 41.9 million.

They can add Verlander, have him as an upgrade over Lackey and a dude who could replace Hendricks in the playoff rotation if need be (I love Kyle and am not down on him long term but if he's gonna throw 84/85 this year he's not the same dude we saw last year, and I'd hesitate to throw him out there in October), and then have him as their 5th starter for 2 more years and not have a more expensive rotation/battery than this year. Shouldn't limit their ability to add whatever else they need. As stated before Verlander's 2020 option only vests if he's top 5 in Cy voting in 2019 so paying 22 million for him in 2020 if he's producing like that still is not terrible at all (especially when the Qualifying Offer this year is supposed to be 18 mil, if it keeps rising at that rate 22 million in 2020 will be what a one year contract for any halfway decent vet starter is going to be anyway).

[Brownie]

Who says Detroit won't pick up some salary or sweeten the pot with another player like Alex Avila to get rid of the contract? I know what "reports" say, but negotiations are hard.

[Quality Start Machine]

Who says Detroit won't pick up some salary or sweeten the pot with another player like Alex Avila to get rid of the contract? I know what "reports" say, but negotiations are hard.

Mike Ilitch put the Tigers into a trust a while back...so who's holding the purse strings now?

[SKO]

Who says Detroit won't pick up some salary or sweeten the pot with another player like Alex Avila to get rid of the contract? I know what "reports" say, but negotiations are hard.

Mike Ilitch put the Tigers into a trust a while back...so who's holding the purse strings now?

Yeah I don't think Detroit is gonna throw in much salary relief, the rumors are they need to dump salary even if it hurts them prospect wise. One rumor even said they considered packaging Fulmer with some of their other big contracts to try to get people to take them. My guess is Theo knows he's got the most money of anyone that is interested (Boston has too many overpaid underachievers in their rotation already, LA won't pay anymore luxury tax and also isn't exactly desperate at 71-31, Yankees no interest so far, Nats are broke) and he's given his best offer, Detroit is waiting as long as they can to see if Theo gets desperate enough to add more prospects to the deal, but he's willing to wait them out instead.

[CBStew]

Chuck has been owned online.

I've come around to Verlander too. Candelario is never getting any time to play unless Kris Bryant dies in a Red Bull stunt gone horribly wrong. I'd rather see what Verlander has left than watch Lackey reliably suck, too.

All bets are off if they can land a Sonny Gray or even a Yu Darvish but that's looking extremely unlikely.

Yeah in my mind they aren't acquiring Verlander to be Justin Verlander^TM they are acquiring him to be a better version of John Lackey. I would still hope they'd go out in the offseason and chase a guy like Darvish, but with the prospects they have left Verlander might bet he best guy left that can help this year and also hold down a spot next year.

I'm sorry, but are you guys soberly discussing dealing Candelario to replace a 5th starter with 10 more starts this year who wouldn't even project to be in the playoff  rotation?  Am I missing something here?  I'm not even that attached to Candelario and I have my doubts that he's anything more than AAAA but you still don't just throw a guy like that away, which is what you'd be doing for 10 Verlander starts to ensure a division that would be won with Lackey--unless you're talking about Verlander replacing Arrieta which, okay if it's worth it I guess go ahead but otherwise I think your collective hatred of Lackey is really driving some of you guys to Stupidville.

Verlander is under control for more than just this year, IDITO. He's signed through 2019 with a 2020 vesting option.

He's a replacement for Lackey starting now through 2019 and that's probably what Candelario is worth. Not just ten starts.

The Cubs are looking for another starter under control. The fact that 40% of next year's rotation (Hendricks, Montgomery) will make bupkus makes the 20 mildo for Verlander easier to absorb.

A rotation of Lester/Quintana/Hendricks/Verlander/Montgomery should get them into October a couple times. There's nobody in Iowa who can step in, and even in AA nobody's exactly setting the world on fire. So the Cubs will need to go outside the organization for starting pitching the next couple years.

Yep, again, gonna do the math for IDITOS like Huard:

Lackey/Arrieta/Montero 2017: 45 million

I am gonna guess whoever the backup catcher is next year will make no more than about 5 million, tops, and even that is probably an overstatement if they roll with Caratini. Assume Quintana replaces Jake as your #2, Verlander replaces Lackey as your 5 (who could potentially slot into the playoff rotation if his couple of starts and the fact that he hit 98 mph the other night indicate he's regaining last year's form).  Total cost of those guys in 2018:

Quintana (8.9 mil)/Verlander (28 Mil)/Rando Backup Catcher (5 Mil): 41.9 million.

They can add Verlander, have him as an upgrade over Lackey and a dude who could replace Hendricks in the playoff rotation if need be (I love Kyle and am not down on him long term but if he's gonna throw 84/85 this year he's not the same dude we saw last year, and I'd hesitate to throw him out there in October), and then have him as their 5th starter for 2 more years and not have a more expensive rotation/battery than this year. Shouldn't limit their ability to add whatever else they need. As stated before Verlander's 2020 option only vests if he's top 5 in Cy voting in 2019 so paying 22 million for him in 2020 if he's producing like that still is not terrible at all (especially when the Qualifying Offer this year is supposed to be 18 mil, if it keeps rising at that rate 22 million in 2020 will be what a one year contract for any halfway decent vet starter is going to be anyway).

You don't get it.  None of this matters.  In 2016 the Cubs sold their soul to the devil for a World Series win.  They are where they are in the NL Central only because the other teams in that division made a worse deal than the Cubs.  Rent "Damn Yankees" if you don't believe me.

[SKO]

You don't get it.  None of this matters.  In 2016 the Cubs sold their soul to the devil for a World Series win.  They are where they are in the NL Central only because the other teams in that division made a worse deal than the Cubs.  Rent "Damn Yankees" if you don't believe me.

I really do not give a shit that the Cubs are playing in a weak division. In 2015 they won 97 games and finished third, and lost in the NLCS to a 91 win Mets team that got absolutely pummeled all year long by every winning team they faced and got into the playoffs by fattening up on the Phillies/Marlins/Braves. Last year the Dodgers under-achieved and dicked around for months before getting hot, winning their division with 91 wins and riding it all of the way to game 6 vs a superior Cubs team. The Cardinals spent an entire decade getting into the playoffs with the 3rd or 4th best team in the national league by virtue of being in a hapless division and then spent those Octobers lucking their way to pennants or world series. This is how the game works.

This Cubs team right now is playing like it was supposed to before the season. Fangraphs has them projected to win 90 games. They have the same record right now that they had at this point in 2015 (53-47) and again, that team won 97 games. If they get to October it'll be because they have as much right as anyone else to be there, and with the rotation pitching as well as it has been in the 2nd half (and with the potential addition of a guy like Verlander) they'll have a damn good shot at winning at all.  

[CBStew]

You don't get it.  None of this matters.  In 2016 the Cubs sold their soul to the devil for a World Series win.  They are where they are in the NL Central only because the other teams in that division made a worse deal than the Cubs.  Rent "Damn Yankees" if you don't believe me.

I really do not give a shit that the Cubs are playing in a weak division. In 2015 they won 97 games and finished third, and lost in the NLCS to a 91 win Mets team that got absolutely pummeled all year long by every winning team they faced and got into the playoffs by fattening up on the Phillies/Marlins/Braves. Last year the Dodgers under-achieved and dicked around for months before getting hot, winning their division with 91 wins and riding it all of the way to game 6 vs a superior Cubs team. The Cardinals spent an entire decade getting into the playoffs with the 3rd or 4th best team in the national league by virtue of being in a hapless division and then spent those Octobers lucking their way to pennants or world series. This is how the game works.

This Cubs team right now is playing like it was supposed to before the season. Fangraphs has them projected to win 90 games. They have the same record right now that they had at this point in 2015 (53-47) and again, that team won 97 games. If they get to October it'll be because they have as much right as anyone else to be there, and with the rotation pitching as well as it has been in the 2nd half (and with the potential addition of a guy like Verlander) they'll have a damn good shot at winning at all.  

Remind me next time to post with a "sarcasm alert".

[Oleg]

Yep, again, gonna do the math for IDITOS like Huard:

Lackey/Arrieta/Montero 2017: 45 million

I am gonna guess whoever the backup catcher is next year will make no more than about 5 million, tops, and even that is probably an overstatement if they roll with Caratini. Assume Quintana replaces Jake as your #2, Verlander replaces Lackey as your 5 (who could potentially slot into the playoff rotation if his couple of starts and the fact that he hit 98 mph the other night indicate he's regaining last year's form).  Total cost of those guys in 2018:

Quintana (8.9 mil)/Verlander (28 Mil)/Rando Backup Catcher (5 Mil): 41.9 million.

They can add Verlander, have him as an upgrade over Lackey and a dude who could replace Hendricks in the playoff rotation if need be (I love Kyle and am not down on him long term but if he's gonna throw 84/85 this year he's not the same dude we saw last year, and I'd hesitate to throw him out there in October), and then have him as their 5th starter for 2 more years and not have a more expensive rotation/battery than this year. Shouldn't limit their ability to add whatever else they need. As stated before Verlander's 2020 option only vests if he's top 5 in Cy voting in 2019 so paying 22 million for him in 2020 if he's producing like that still is not terrible at all (especially when the Qualifying Offer this year is supposed to be 18 mil, if it keeps rising at that rate 22 million in 2020 will be what a one year contract for any halfway decent vet starter is going to be anyway).

So, we're just going to pretend that Bryant, Russell, and Hendricks don't get raises in arbitration?

I suppose you can argue that Russell's raise will be somewhat modest.
Hendricks finished top-3 in Cy Young last year, which carries a lot of weight.
I think it'll be quite a surprise if Bryant doesn't set a Super-2 record for first year arb.

Look, I'm not saying the Cubs can't afford Verlander.  But, I'd rather not take that type of risk on a 35 year old pitcher who ran a .255 BABIP last year and has a 35% GB rate.

As always, though (and not that it matters), I'll defer to Epstink.

[SKO]

Yep, again, gonna do the math for IDITOS like Huard:

Lackey/Arrieta/Montero 2017: 45 million

I am gonna guess whoever the backup catcher is next year will make no more than about 5 million, tops, and even that is probably an overstatement if they roll with Caratini. Assume Quintana replaces Jake as your #2, Verlander replaces Lackey as your 5 (who could potentially slot into the playoff rotation if his couple of starts and the fact that he hit 98 mph the other night indicate he's regaining last year's form).  Total cost of those guys in 2018:

Quintana (8.9 mil)/Verlander (28 Mil)/Rando Backup Catcher (5 Mil): 41.9 million.

They can add Verlander, have him as an upgrade over Lackey and a dude who could replace Hendricks in the playoff rotation if need be (I love Kyle and am not down on him long term but if he's gonna throw 84/85 this year he's not the same dude we saw last year, and I'd hesitate to throw him out there in October), and then have him as their 5th starter for 2 more years and not have a more expensive rotation/battery than this year. Shouldn't limit their ability to add whatever else they need. As stated before Verlander's 2020 option only vests if he's top 5 in Cy voting in 2019 so paying 22 million for him in 2020 if he's producing like that still is not terrible at all (especially when the Qualifying Offer this year is supposed to be 18 mil, if it keeps rising at that rate 22 million in 2020 will be what a one year contract for any halfway decent vet starter is going to be anyway).

So, we're just going to pretend that Bryant, Russell, and Hendricks don't get raises in arbitration?

I suppose you can argue that Russell's raise will be somewhat modest.
Hendricks finished top-3 in Cy Young last year, which carries a lot of weight.
I think it'll be quite a surprise if Bryant doesn't set a Super-2 record for first year arb.

Look, I'm not saying the Cubs can't afford Verlander.  But, I'd rather not take that type of risk on a 35 year old pitcher who ran a .255 BABIP last year and has a 35% GB rate.

As always, though (and not that it matters), I'll defer to Epstink.

I did forget about Bryant being a Super-2 player. Either way I think the team needs at least two new starters for next year. Maybe they decide to leave one of those spots up for competition again between Mike Montgomery and some of the starters in the high minors, but if they're adding a pitcher in FA it might be worth it to decide that 2+ years of Verlander is easier to swallow than giving someone even a Mike Leake-ish contract if they don't land a guy like Darvish.

[Oleg]

Yep, again, gonna do the math for IDITOS like Huard:

Lackey/Arrieta/Montero 2017: 45 million

I am gonna guess whoever the backup catcher is next year will make no more than about 5 million, tops, and even that is probably an overstatement if they roll with Caratini. Assume Quintana replaces Jake as your #2, Verlander replaces Lackey as your 5 (who could potentially slot into the playoff rotation if his couple of starts and the fact that he hit 98 mph the other night indicate he's regaining last year's form).  Total cost of those guys in 2018:

Quintana (8.9 mil)/Verlander (28 Mil)/Rando Backup Catcher (5 Mil): 41.9 million.

They can add Verlander, have him as an upgrade over Lackey and a dude who could replace Hendricks in the playoff rotation if need be (I love Kyle and am not down on him long term but if he's gonna throw 84/85 this year he's not the same dude we saw last year, and I'd hesitate to throw him out there in October), and then have him as their 5th starter for 2 more years and not have a more expensive rotation/battery than this year. Shouldn't limit their ability to add whatever else they need. As stated before Verlander's 2020 option only vests if he's top 5 in Cy voting in 2019 so paying 22 million for him in 2020 if he's producing like that still is not terrible at all (especially when the Qualifying Offer this year is supposed to be 18 mil, if it keeps rising at that rate 22 million in 2020 will be what a one year contract for any halfway decent vet starter is going to be anyway).

So, we're just going to pretend that Bryant, Russell, and Hendricks don't get raises in arbitration?

I suppose you can argue that Russell's raise will be somewhat modest.
Hendricks finished top-3 in Cy Young last year, which carries a lot of weight.
I think it'll be quite a surprise if Bryant doesn't set a Super-2 record for first year arb.

Look, I'm not saying the Cubs can't afford Verlander.  But, I'd rather not take that type of risk on a 35 year old pitcher who ran a .255 BABIP last year and has a 35% GB rate.

As always, though (and not that it matters), I'll defer to Epstink.

I did forget about Bryant being a Super-2 player. Either way I think the team needs at least two new starters for next year. Maybe they decide to leave one of those spots up for competition again between Mike Montgomery and some of the starters in the high minors, but if they're adding a pitcher in FA it might be worth it to decide that 2+ years of Verlander is easier to swallow than giving someone even a Mike Leake-ish contract if they don't land a guy like Darvish.

They'll also have to replace Davis and Uehara, even if that happens with more Davis and maybe more Uehara.

The Cubs certainly have flexibility and I'm not suggesting they can't afford Verlander or any other higher priced starter.  I suppose there is an argument to be made that it's more important to consider term than AAV.  But, would signing someone like Darvish to a Lester contract be a better use of money (when considering performance) than trading for Verlander, if we're looking past this year?

I see your point about settling for a Leake-ish starter.  But I also hold out hope that Epstink sees that and just decides that Monty would be a better alternative anyway.

[Quality Start Machine]

Yep, again, gonna do the math for IDITOS like Huard:

Lackey/Arrieta/Montero 2017: 45 million

I am gonna guess whoever the backup catcher is next year will make no more than about 5 million, tops, and even that is probably an overstatement if they roll with Caratini. Assume Quintana replaces Jake as your #2, Verlander replaces Lackey as your 5 (who could potentially slot into the playoff rotation if his couple of starts and the fact that he hit 98 mph the other night indicate he's regaining last year's form).  Total cost of those guys in 2018:

Quintana (8.9 mil)/Verlander (28 Mil)/Rando Backup Catcher (5 Mil): 41.9 million.

They can add Verlander, have him as an upgrade over Lackey and a dude who could replace Hendricks in the playoff rotation if need be (I love Kyle and am not down on him long term but if he's gonna throw 84/85 this year he's not the same dude we saw last year, and I'd hesitate to throw him out there in October), and then have him as their 5th starter for 2 more years and not have a more expensive rotation/battery than this year. Shouldn't limit their ability to add whatever else they need. As stated before Verlander's 2020 option only vests if he's top 5 in Cy voting in 2019 so paying 22 million for him in 2020 if he's producing like that still is not terrible at all (especially when the Qualifying Offer this year is supposed to be 18 mil, if it keeps rising at that rate 22 million in 2020 will be what a one year contract for any halfway decent vet starter is going to be anyway).

So, we're just going to pretend that Bryant, Russell, and Hendricks don't get raises in arbitration?

I suppose you can argue that Russell's raise will be somewhat modest.
Hendricks finished top-3 in Cy Young last year, which carries a lot of weight.
I think it'll be quite a surprise if Bryant doesn't set a Super-2 record for first year arb.

Look, I'm not saying the Cubs can't afford Verlander.  But, I'd rather not take that type of risk on a 35 year old pitcher who ran a .255 BABIP last year and has a 35% GB rate.

As always, though (and not that it matters), I'll defer to Epstink.

I did forget about Bryant being a Super-2 player. Either way I think the team needs at least two new starters for next year. Maybe they decide to leave one of those spots up for competition again between Mike Montgomery and some of the starters in the high minors, but if they're adding a pitcher in FA it might be worth it to decide that 2+ years of Verlander is easier to swallow than giving someone even a Mike Leake-ish contract if they don't land a guy like Darvish.

They'll also have to replace Davis and Uehara, even if that happens with more Davis and maybe more Uehara.

The Cubs certainly have flexibility and I'm not suggesting they can't afford Verlander or any other higher priced starter.  I suppose there is an argument to be made that it's more important to consider term than AAV.  But, would signing someone like Darvish to a Lester contract be a better use of money (when considering performance) than trading for Verlander, if we're looking past this year?

I see your point about settling for a Leake-ish starter.  But I also hold out hope that Epstink sees that and just decides that Monty would be a better alternative anyway.

The thing we don't know is whether Jepstink is looking at the available starters through trade now and FA later whether they want to go long or short term.

The FA starting pitching crop isn't much this winter outside of Jake and Darvish. And 2018 is a year where a lot of really fucking good players have options coming up. So they might decide to keep their powder dry for that.

[SKO]

So, we're just going to pretend that Bryant, Russell, and Hendricks don't get raises in arbitration?

I suppose you can argue that Russell's raise will be somewhat modest.
Hendricks finished top-3 in Cy Young last year, which carries a lot of weight.
I think it'll be quite a surprise if Bryant doesn't set a Super-2 record for first year arb.

Look, I'm not saying the Cubs can't afford Verlander.  But, I'd rather not take that type of risk on a 35 year old pitcher who ran a .255 BABIP last year and has a 35% GB rate.

As always, though (and not that it matters), I'll defer to Epstink.

I did forget about Bryant being a Super-2 player. Either way I think the team needs at least two new starters for next year. Maybe they decide to leave one of those spots up for competition again between Mike Montgomery and some of the starters in the high minors, but if they're adding a pitcher in FA it might be worth it to decide that 2+ years of Verlander is easier to swallow than giving someone even a Mike Leake-ish contract if they don't land a guy like Darvish.

They'll also have to replace Davis and Uehara, even if that happens with more Davis and maybe more Uehara.

The Cubs certainly have flexibility and I'm not suggesting they can't afford Verlander or any other higher priced starter.  I suppose there is an argument to be made that it's more important to consider term than AAV.  But, would signing someone like Darvish to a Lester contract be a better use of money (when considering performance) than trading for Verlander, if we're looking past this year?

I see your point about settling for a Leake-ish starter.  But I also hold out hope that Epstink sees that and just decides that Monty would be a better alternative anyway.

The thing we don't know is whether Jepstink is looking at the available starters through trade now and FA later whether they want to go long or short term.

The FA starting pitching crop isn't much this winter outside of Jake and Darvish. And 2018 is a year where a lot of really fucking good players have options coming up. So they might decide to keep their powder dry for that.

Which is kinda why Verlander makes sense. His contract will run out not long after said FA starter begins?

The way I see it 2018 rotation:

Lester
Quintana
Hendricks
???????
???????

How do you want to fill those two spots? You want to trade for someone young and good and controllable? Well we just emptied the prospect bank for Quintana. You comfortable giving up Baez or someone on the 25 man?

You wanna let Mike Montgomery and Eddie Butler or Jen Ho Tseng or whatever compete for those spots? Maybe one, I don't feel comfortable leaving two up.

So my guess is they're looking at at least one free agent starting pitcher. Now maybe they try to find the next Jason Hammel/John Lackey who are willing to sign a 1-2 year deal at league average. If that's the case, why not Verlander? His deal is up after 2019, unless he's still pitching like Justin Verlander, Ace. You could fill a spot for the next two years and if you do chase that FA starter after next year his Mega-Contract and Verlander's will probably only coincide for one year, you can backload said starter's deal accordingly.

I guess not to go all Fork on everybody but the Cubs projected luxury tax # for next year 78 million or something. They could add Verlander AND Darvish, stay under the luxury tax, and "all" it costs is a fuck ton of money. Trading for another starter is probably costing you someone who is currently on the major league roster that's going to hurt like hell to say goodbye to.

[SKO]

Ah fuck we're going to end up with Lance Lynn aren't we

[Quality Start Machine]

Ah fuck we're going to end up with Lance Lynn aren't we

Here's your shopping list. I admit it, I thought Pineda signed an extension with the Yankees.