Quote:
Originally Posted by jd1020
Spoken like a Royals fan who doesnt want to see the player who he just bought a jersey for traded no matter how meaningless his future is to the teams chances of competing down the line.
It's the equivalent to the Cubs when they held onto Castro in the middle of their intentionally tanking years. Only it actually made a little bit of sense for the Cubs to hang on to Castro given his age up until the point when they traded for Russell when they already had Baez in the minors. Castro had 1 bad year and bounced back and they should have traded him right then because you knew where the future lied. Instead they held onto him for another year and he crashed again and they wound up with ****ing Adam Warren who they traded back to the same team they got him from 7 months later because he was terrible.
|
It’s not about sentiment. It’s about the value you’re receiving back.
If the best they’re getting offers for is a package that doesn’t even have a single top 100 guy in it, there’s no point in trading him 4.5 years out.
With that amount of control, you can wait the market out a little bit, at least to the offseason.
And if the returns remain marginal, there’s just not much point. If you’re moving him for scratchers tickets, you can do that at any point moving forward.