13 hours ago, rmc523 said:

Hampson also hadn't done much before last year, and last year could've been a career year.

possibly, but he will always be a good bunter and speed won't slump either, and we needed to move runners over and he was the only guy on the team who could bunt. regardless if he's having a career year, his main skills were his speed and bunting and that won't really slump.

9 hours ago, UpperDeckFishTank said:

possibly, but he will always be a good bunter and speed won't slump either, and we needed to move runners over and he was the only guy on the team who could bunt. regardless if he's having a career year, his main skills were his speed and bunting and that won't really slump.

Yes.  Let's keep a guy because he can bunt.

49 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

Yes.  Let's keep a guy because he can bunt.

Exactly what I was thinking and as if there aren't hundreds of others who can replace him just fine if not better. 

I believe this team would looking for the PLAYERS in the winter meeting. 

Oh I like that news. If Brant Brown did well enough here and we think his work was worth continuing then promoting his assistant coach makes a lot of sense.

10 minutes ago, TaiwanMarlins said:

I believe this team would looking for the PLAYERS in the winter meeting. 

No way

15 minutes ago, TaiwanMarlins said:

I believe this team would looking for the PLAYERS in the winter meeting. 

Good thing the Winter Meetings haven't started.

50 minutes ago, TaiwanMarlins said:

I believe this team would looking for the PLAYERS in the winter meeting. 

players are overated. The way we win is to have the best coaches money can buy. This guy is so good he could turn you into a .300 hitter. 

5 hours ago, rmc523 said:

Yes.  Let's keep a guy because he can bunt.

i would rather a guy who can bunt then a guy trying to mash 100 homers a season and only hit 10 but everyone watches baseball for different reasons

More depth!

 

 

 

Throws hard, that's about it. A fun project.

1 hour ago, UpperDeckFishTank said:

i would rather a guy who can bunt then a guy trying to mash 100 homers a season and only hit 10 but everyone watches baseball for different reasons

You watch baseball to watch bunting?  Interesting.

58 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

You watch baseball to watch bunting?  Interesting.

yea i enjoy watching teams playing the game using tactics, someone recommended before i watch the npb cuz they have much more tactics/hit n runs/bunting/strategies etc than in mlb. tbh if i just want to see homeruns i would watch the homerun derby only and that is boring to me. i cant stand watching guys overswing in the game trying to mash a ball in the dirt or 'just missing' pitches over the middle cuz they tried to hit a homer instead of aim their bat for solid contact.

Arraez is exciting, I'll give you that.

16 minutes ago, Michael said:

Arraez is exciting, I'll give you that.

i love arraez hes my favorite player since juan pierre

Only if he's our No.3 catcher. 

Edited December 2, 20232 yr by TaiwanMarlins

4 hours ago, TaiwanMarlins said:

Only if he's our THIRD catcher

9 hours ago, TaiwanMarlins said:

Only if he's our No.3 catcher. 

Dominican Stallings!

The thing with Maldonado is that he wouldn't be much better than Stallings but with the lack of catcher options available and the fact that we literally only have Fortes right now, having Maldonado would at least feel like a "better than nothing" option so I wouldn't hate it right now. He would technically be an upgrade at the moment, might be a fair stop gap until they figure out a better solution. 

11 minutes ago, SilverBullet said:

The thing with Maldonado is that he wouldn't be much better than Stallings but with the lack of catcher options available and the fact that we literally only have Fortes right now, having Maldonado would at least feel like a "better than nothing" option so I wouldn't hate it right now. He would technically be an upgrade at the moment, might be a fair stop gap until they figure out a better solution. 

So what was the point in getting rid of Stallings then?

7 minutes ago, Sherman shill said:

So what was the point in getting rid of Stallings then?

I would assume just on the hope that a better option would surface and/or that whoever is next would be better than him. Stallings was really bad, keeping him would have been saying it's OK to have a starting catcher that bad. Getting rid of him is at least an effort to try and fix the catching problem. 

1 hour ago, SilverBullet said:

The thing with Maldonado is that he wouldn't be much better than Stallings but with the lack of catcher options available and the fact that we literally only have Fortes right now, having Maldonado would at least feel like a "better than nothing" option so I wouldn't hate it right now. He would technically be an upgrade at the moment, might be a fair stop gap until they figure out a better solution. 

Bendix said he wants to add TWO catchers so maybe Maldonado is the secondary one and let's hope Garver is the primary one. 

Maldanado isn’t even good defender anymore he’s like 40. Rather have stallings or Alfaro that’s his bad he is.

hire him as a coach or assistant GMor something 

17 minutes ago, pollythewog said:

Maldanado isn’t even good defender anymore he’s like 40. Rather have stallings or Alfaro that’s his bad he is.

hire him as a coach or assistant GMor something 

He'll be C1 next season just wait and see lol

4 minutes ago, Sherman shill said:

He'll be C1 next season just wait and see lol

Maybe since we usually hire guys off their career best years hiring one of his career worst year may work out?

50 minutes ago, pollythewog said:

Maybe since we usually hire guys off their career best years hiring one of his career worst year may work out?

Are we bringing Donnie Baseball back to be GM then?