Indians to Sign Michael Bourn

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Indians to Sign Michael Bourn

    In response to mef429's comment:

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

     

    The Red Sox avoided Bourn. Unfortunately, they signed cast off in decline Shane to a wheelchair contract. That's how you pay over 150 million a year and don't win any playoff games.

     




    noted: you wanted BC to sign bourne.

     



    softy bashed me earlier for suggesting we trade Ellsbury and sign Bourn. (Note: not the trade Ellsbury part.)

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Drewski5. Show Drewski5's posts

    Re: Indians to Sign Michael Bourn

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    In response to mef429's comment:

     

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

     

    The Red Sox avoided Bourn. Unfortunately, they signed cast off in decline Shane to a wheelchair contract. That's how you pay over 150 million a year and don't win any playoff games.

     




    noted: you wanted BC to sign bourne.

     

     



    softy bashed me earlier for suggesting we trade Ellsbury and sign Bourn. (Note: not the trade Ellsbury part.)

     



    Would have cost us our pick though.  Not disagreeing with your notion, just pointing out that this plan would cost us our high draft pick.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Indians to Sign Michael Bourn

    In response to Drewski5's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    In response to mef429's comment:

     

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

     

    The Red Sox avoided Bourn. Unfortunately, they signed cast off in decline Shane to a wheelchair contract. That's how you pay over 150 million a year and don't win any playoff games.

     




    noted: you wanted BC to sign bourne.

     

     



    softy bashed me earlier for suggesting we trade Ellsbury and sign Bourn. (Note: not the trade Ellsbury part.)

     

     



    Would have cost us our pick though.  Not disagreeing with your notion, just pointing out that this plan would cost us our high draft pick.

     



    Only our 2nd round pick. The first is protected.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from mef429. Show mef429's posts

    Re: Indians to Sign Michael Bourn

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    In response to Drewski5's comment:

     

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    In response to mef429's comment:

     

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

     

    The Red Sox avoided Bourn. Unfortunately, they signed cast off in decline Shane to a wheelchair contract. That's how you pay over 150 million a year and don't win any playoff games.

     




    noted: you wanted BC to sign bourne.

     

     



    softy bashed me earlier for suggesting we trade Ellsbury and sign Bourn. (Note: not the trade Ellsbury part.)

     

     



    Would have cost us our pick though.  Not disagreeing with your notion, just pointing out that this plan would cost us our high draft pick.

     

     



    Only our 2nd round pick. The first is protected.

     




    i'm against giving up ANY pick, especially for bourne...

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Indians to Sign Michael Bourn

    In response to mef429's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    In response to Drewski5's comment:

     

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    In response to mef429's comment:

     

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

     

    The Red Sox avoided Bourn. Unfortunately, they signed cast off in decline Shane to a wheelchair contract. That's how you pay over 150 million a year and don't win any playoff games.

     




    noted: you wanted BC to sign bourne.

     

     



    softy bashed me earlier for suggesting we trade Ellsbury and sign Bourn. (Note: not the trade Ellsbury part.)

     

     



    Would have cost us our pick though.  Not disagreeing with your notion, just pointing out that this plan would cost us our high draft pick.

     

     



    Only our 2nd round pick. The first is protected.

     

     




    i'm against giving up ANY pick, especially for bourne...

     



    I'm not a great Bourn fan, but I'd much rather have the 30 year old Bourn at $48M/4 minus a second round pick than the 32 year old Vicotrino at $39M/3 and the 2nd round pick intact.

    Plus, we'd have prospects from trading Ellsbury that should be better than what we get in the second round. That is the balance tipper.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Indians to Sign Michael Bourn

    How much brighter would our future look had we done at least 2 or 3 of...

     

    Traded Ellsbury, Salty, and Miller for prospects.

    Traded Lester for Myers.

    Signed the younger, slightly better, and cheaper Bourn rather than Victorino.

    Signed A Sanchez instead of Dempster and Drew.

     

    ??? 

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: Indians to Sign Michael Bourn

    In response to carnie's comment:

    I guess this means the Tribe won't be counting on Grady Sizemore. :-)




    I dont think any team is carnie...As well they shouldnt. I hope he can make a comeback, but it doesnt look good.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: Indians to Sign Michael Bourn

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    In response to mef429's comment:

     

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    In response to Drewski5's comment:

     

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    In response to mef429's comment:

     

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

     

    The Red Sox avoided Bourn. Unfortunately, they signed cast off in decline Shane to a wheelchair contract. That's how you pay over 150 million a year and don't win any playoff games.

     




    noted: you wanted BC to sign bourne.

     

     



    softy bashed me earlier for suggesting we trade Ellsbury and sign Bourn. (Note: not the trade Ellsbury part.)

     

     



    Would have cost us our pick though.  Not disagreeing with your notion, just pointing out that this plan would cost us our high draft pick.

     

     



    Only our 2nd round pick. The first is protected.

     

     




    i'm against giving up ANY pick, especially for bourne...

     

     



    I'm not a great Bourn fan, but I'd much rather have the 30 year old Bourn at $48M/4 minus a second round pick than the 32 year old Vicotrino at $39M/3 and the 2nd round pick intact.

     

    Plus, we'd have prospects from trading Ellsbury that should be better than what we get in the second round. That is the balance tipper.




    Who are these prospects that were trading Ells for? They dangled his name out there and were not offered much or they wouldve jumped at it. I think teams want to see who the real Jacoby is before they put a true value on him. I dont blame them either.

    Bournes K rate is scary and will not be worth the contact come year 3. I think SV has the edge over Bourne. I like the way SV plays the game, his personality, he is solid at all 3 OF positions, and posseses a strong arm. That, and his deal is only 3 years. Id take SV over MB.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: Indians to Sign Michael Bourn

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    How much brighter would our future look had we done at least 2 or 3 of...

     

    Traded Ellsbury, Salty, and Miller for prospects.

    Traded Lester for Myers.

    Signed the younger, slightly better, and cheaper Bourn rather than Victorino.

    Signed A Sanchez instead of Dempster and Drew.

     

    ??? 

     




    They tried to trade Ells, with no good return or else I think they wouldve pulled the trigger. Salty should stay. I dont want Lav or Butler having to be "the man" in case something happens. Miller? I could go either way, but hes turned into one heck of a Loogy.

     

    We would have had to trade Lester and probably another MLB starter to match the Rays offer. That would leave us with a much weaker rotation. Even if it was Lester for Myers straight up (which would be lopsided as Lester has far more value than Myers right now), who do we slot in the TOTR? We NEED pitching depth(unlike the Rays), not trade it away. Especially one of our best starters.

    Sanchez didnt want to come here so thats an empty conversation. He wanted a chance at a WSC and was open about wanting to resign with Detroit. Plus in reality, hes a #3 type pitcher, not a TOTR starter IMO.

    Personally, I like SV more than Bourne for a number of reason stated above...

     

     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Indians to Sign Michael Bourn

    Who are these prospects that were trading Ells for? They dangled his name out there and were not offered much or they wouldve jumped at it. I think teams want to see who the real Jacoby is before they put a true value on him. I dont blame them either.

     

    We don't know what was offered to be able to say we can't blame them or not.

     

     

    Bournes K rate is scary and will not be worth the contact come year 3. I think SV has the edge over Bourne. I like the way SV plays the game, his personality, he is solid at all 3 OF positions, and posseses a strong arm. That, and his deal is only 3 years. Id take SV over MB.

    Bourn just turned 30: SV just turned 32. Bourn will be younger in year 4 than SV will be in his last year (year 3). Bourn has shown he has gotten better over the last 3-4 years: SV has gotten worse. Bourn is a great fileder, but perhaps SV's arm is better. I'd say they are about even, but the avg cost per year ($12 to $13M) and the total prime years (3 to 1) gives Bourn the edge.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Indians to Sign Michael Bourn

    Sanchez ...is a #3 type pitcher, not a TOTR starter IMO.

    If he's a number 3, then we have no starters that are 1s or 2s.

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Indians to Sign Michael Bourn

    Shane's only real value would be 140 plus games in CF, which he's not capable of without breaking down. 

    He's played 143, 149, 143, 130, and 154 games in the OF the last 5 years. of which 139, 149, 143, 130, and 109 have been in CF. (He only played in LF last year because the Dodgers already had a CF'er when they traded for him. 

    I do agree that choosing Bourn over SV is not saying much, but do try and get your facts right.

     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Ice-Cream. Show Ice-Cream's posts

    Re: Indians to Sign Michael Bourn

    The Indians spent a lot of money this offseason.

    The Indians will be a fun team to watch. 

     
  18. This post has been removed.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from EnchiladaT. Show EnchiladaT's posts

    Re: Indians to Sign Michael Bourn

    The Indians are resting their pitching hopes a second straight year on Ubaldo. There is nothing to indicate he will be the fireballer they need him to be.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Ice-Cream. Show Ice-Cream's posts

    Re: Indians to Sign Michael Bourn

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

    Ice-Cream, I like your style, but the Red Sox have been speding tons of money for years and have not been fun for me to watch. To each his own;) We'll see, on the Injuns.



    Thanks softlaw2   :)

    Hopefully this year, the Red Sox will be more fun to watch for all of us!   

    I think the Red Sox will have a brawl with the Yankees or O's this year.  Just my gut feeling.  LOL

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from mef429. Show mef429's posts

    Re: Indians to Sign Michael Bourn

    In response to Ice-Cream's comment:

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

     

    Ice-Cream, I like your style, but the Red Sox have been speding tons of money for years and have not been fun for me to watch. To each his own;) We'll see, on the Injuns.

     



    Thanks softlaw2   :)

     

    Hopefully this year, the Red Sox will be more fun to watch for all of us!   

    I think the Red Sox will have a brawl with the Yankees or O's this year.  Just my gut feeling.  LOL



    i hope it's the O's. i hate the yankees and all but that's taken a backseat to the orioles and Rays these past few years

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Ice-Cream. Show Ice-Cream's posts

    Re: Indians to Sign Michael Bourn

    Hey mef429  :)

    A brawl with the O's or Rays would be sweet.

    With the AL East so well-balanced and intense, there will be a brawl sooner or later.  LOL

     

     
  23. This post has been removed.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Indians to Sign Michael Bourn

    I guess a good brawl is all we realistically have to look forward to.

     
  25. This post has been removed.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share