Post by Rog on Jun 9, 2017 7:27:42 GMT -5
I'm not sure I've ever felt trading for a player having such a horrible season was such a good idea as trading for Sam Dyson. Huge risk player/very low risk financially/high reward possibility in return for a player to be named. That's the kind of deal a team needing to improve its bullpen should make.
Dyson has been AWFUL this season -- in every way I can identify. But last season he saved 38 games and was good in doing so. As a set up man, he was likely even better in 2015.
Nice add. He might turn out to be at the end of his career. But he could also be a valuable reliever. What more can one ask at the exceptionally low price of a player to be named?
Remember, for instance, how much the Giants got out of Pat Burrell, whom they picked up for nothing? This is looking for lightning in a bottle.
Dyson has been AWFUL this season -- in every way I can identify. But last season he saved 38 games and was good in doing so. As a set up man, he was likely even better in 2015.
Nice add. He might turn out to be at the end of his career. But he could also be a valuable reliever. What more can one ask at the exceptionally low price of a player to be named?
Remember, for instance, how much the Giants got out of Pat Burrell, whom they picked up for nothing? This is looking for lightning in a bottle.
