Re: Which is the worst Ben Cherry GM move?
posted at 1/12/2013 2:17 PM EST
In response to Softlaw1's comment:
1: They payroll is lower and they have more depth.
The payroll is almost status quo with around 150 million for 2013 labor costs. "Depth" is meaningless. There will be another 25 and 40 man roster, and there is. It's worse, and costs almost as much.
2: Even with this years signing they still have about 150 less in future payroll.
You obviously don't know anything about inflation and the lesson of 2013 labor costs.
3: From all reports AGon was a bit of a pain to deal with. See text message-gate. AGon was clearly a very talented player whose power disappeared after surgery but he showed multiple times he was not a leader or a player to build a club around.
From "all reports", AGon's power did not "disappear after surgery". AGon showed what it means to have a player who shows up for work, as opposed to clubhouse cancers like Beckett and Ellsbury.
The reality is that management incompetence and Crawbust is why AGon was traded "we hated to do it but, management said".
The narrative is now about Napoli, Morse, Smoak and a revolving door of bums at first base.
It was a bad deal. Beckett should have been traded separately. Ellsbury should be traded. Crawbust should have been retained and traded at a time when his value was not as low as it possible could be.
so to stop a revolving door of shotty 1Bman from materializing his plan is to sign Kotchman........ GENIUS!!