

That's a very good deal for Andrus.
They'll probably end up putting Kinsler in the OF or trading him. Which is the right decision imo.
That's a very good deal for Andrus.
They'll probably end up putting Kinsler in the OF or trading him. Which is the right decision imo.
FreedS[ohh]lave;3773368 said:of course its good for Andrus but why would you sign a singles hitter to that deal?
theyre 'rewarding' their player and you have a problem with that ?I just saw this scroll across MLB Network a few minutes ago and literally went
Are the Rangers out of their mind?


I'm very intrigued to read your rationale for this contract and why you think they can get anything for Kinsler when he just signed a 5/$75 million deal, turned 30 (31 in a couple months) and had the worst season of his career.
theyre 'rewarding' their player and you have a problem with that ?![]()

A lot easier to justify than that prince fielder contract

Rewarding a league MVP is a lot different than a guy who's never hit .300 (or had an OPS above .727), steals bags at an inefficient rate, never scored 100 runs (hitting near the top of a stacked lineup) and has 127 extra base hits in four seasons.
A perennial MVP candidate doesn't deserve a large contract now?
For all you defense stalwarts, why'd the Tigers get swept in the WS? It wasn't because of their below average defense, it was because they couldn't get a big hit to save their lives.
next step- admit to yourself a 1st rounder in football isnt 'trash'
so you agree 'rewarding' players isnt always a good idea ? good. baby steps I guessnext step- admit to yourself a 1st rounder in football isnt 'trash'
and tigers got swept not because yall couldnt get a big hit. you got swept because your hitting was overmatched by good pitching and good defense (crawford, blanco) kept taking away hits from yall while your pitching and defense werent so good.
defense wins championships in nearly every sport except maaaybe bball![]()