A players opportunity to prove is dependent on getting an opportunity.OldRed wrote: ↑24 Apr 2026 11:05 amNot in my opinion. And I think you totally wrong with what a rebuild really is, it is not playing 29-year-old rookies who haven't proven a thing. I rebelieve all you want to do is argue.ecleme22 wrote: ↑24 Apr 2026 10:43 amSure it’s a rebuild. He’s cost controlled, and has more team control than Sagesse.OldRed wrote: ↑24 Apr 2026 10:03 amMy internet has been in and out this morning.ecleme22 wrote: ↑24 Apr 2026 09:01 amSome hypotheticals.
1. Torres is called up, does really well. Plays with the team for 5 years. That's part of the rebuild.
2. Torres is called up, does really well for a year, then is traded for a good, young MLB reliever.
Does a rebuilding team need a producing OFer? Yes. Does a rebuilding team need good bullpen arms? Yes.
But what you describing is not a rebuild. I would rather see a younger player playing in the outfield than a 29-year-old rookie.
A rebuild doesn’t necessarily mean finding a 22 year old who can play here for a decade.
Someone has to say bring him up.
Long careers with a single team are idealistic. What is the average length of time that
an utility type player stays on any one team? Donovan got 4 years, Edman 5.
The Cards just signed a 32 y/o utility fielder to an inexpensive $2M. If able to fill such of
a role with a Torres or other old guys Prieto and Mendoza, for 3-4 seasons how does it become a bad thing for the
roster? Do you think either of those players would block a higher ceiling player?
Trust the system. Better and cheaper will always get the opportunity. More often
when teams don't have to pay for a player to go away as they would with an Urias or higher salaried player.
These players are almost throw away at this point in time and the team by playing them just might be playing the better
player as of today. Better should play.