- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Bryce Harper is very, very good
Posted on 5/30/12 at 10:03 am to LSUlunatic
Posted on 5/30/12 at 10:03 am to LSUlunatic
Pretty good article. The dude is a stud. I plan on him being a star in the league for a long time.
0
Posted on 5/30/12 at 10:13 am to VerlanderBEAST
quote:
If only the Nats hadn't fricked themselves with the Werth Contract
his contract is pretty inconsequential to their success & future success
Posted on 5/30/12 at 10:22 am to Lester Earl
quote:They won't be tied up somewhat financially as a result?
his contract is pretty inconsequential to their success & future success
Posted on 5/30/12 at 10:33 am to LSUlunatic
No shite he is good. I have been pimping him on here for over 3 years.
Posted on 5/30/12 at 10:33 am to lsu480
quote:Visionary
I have been pimping him on here for over 3 years
Posted on 5/30/12 at 10:37 am to LSUlunatic
and we think some of the names we have now are crazy
Oyster Burns and Buttercup Dickerson
Oyster Burns and Buttercup Dickerson
Posted on 5/30/12 at 10:37 am to shel311
I dont think it straps them at all. They have so much homegrown talent (cheap) that is doesn't really matter. And the players they have signed from the outside(ie Laroche, Edwin Jackson) are on pretty friendly deals.
Being the only bad contract on the roster, and having no salary cap, it's not going to hamper them much.
And it's not like he has been totally horrible. He hasn't lived up to the contract thus far, but he is at the least a capable everyday player.
Being the only bad contract on the roster, and having no salary cap, it's not going to hamper them much.
And it's not like he has been totally horrible. He hasn't lived up to the contract thus far, but he is at the least a capable everyday player.
Posted on 5/30/12 at 10:45 am to Lester Earl
quote:
Being the only bad contract on the roster, and having no salary cap, it's not going to hamper them much.
And it's not like he has been totally horrible. He hasn't lived up to the contract thus far, but he is at the least a capable everyday player.
completely agree. I also think it sort of helps them by showing the team is able to spend money, which was an open question. One bad contract, so long as it isn't Vernon Wells bad, won't sink a franchise.
Posted on 5/30/12 at 10:48 am to shel311
Isn't his contract only worth like 18 million right now?
Posted on 5/30/12 at 10:50 am to shel311
Double post
This post was edited on 5/30/12 at 11:05 am
Posted on 5/30/12 at 10:54 am to stevo1905
Money isn't an issue to the Nats. They've been frugal up until the Werth signing, but what many people fail to realize is that Ted Lerner is the richest owner in the MLB. They'll be able to keep their homegrown talent unless the young studs want to play under bigger lights like NY or Boston. The Nats are going to be your NL Rays with alot more money.
Posted on 5/30/12 at 10:59 am to shel311
quote:
quote: I have been pimping him on here for over 3 years Visionary
I know the coaches of the Team USA 16u very well and they had told me all about him. They have coached pretty much every big name coming up over the last 10 years and they said Bryce was head and shoulders above anyone they had ever coached. They said it wasn't even close and nobody was even kind of comparable to him. They are very hard to impress so when they told me that I knew he was gonna be the real deal.
Posted on 5/30/12 at 11:00 am to Lester Earl
quote:I think we're just arguing semantics, really.
I dont think it straps them at all. They have so much homegrown talent (cheap) that is doesn't really matter
You're saying they can win in spite of it.
I was just pointing out that is one less big contract they can offer at a later point, that they'd probably take back if they could.
Posted on 5/30/12 at 11:08 am to shel311
i just took issue with whomever said
"If only the Nats hadn't fricked themselves with the Werth Contract"
I don't think they are fricked at all for the reasons i stated.
who knows. Werth was playing well this year before he got hurt. Can't really justify it after 1 year. He very well could still be a key piece over the next few years.
Even then i still think they'll have the money to sign a bigger name, or keep one of their own.
"If only the Nats hadn't fricked themselves with the Werth Contract"
I don't think they are fricked at all for the reasons i stated.
quote:
I was just pointing out that is one less big contract they can offer at a later point, that they'd probably take back if they could.
who knows. Werth was playing well this year before he got hurt. Can't really justify it after 1 year. He very well could still be a key piece over the next few years.
Even then i still think they'll have the money to sign a bigger name, or keep one of their own.
This post was edited on 5/30/12 at 11:09 am
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News