Page 1 of 1
The non-tendering of Bobby Wilson
Posted: Mon Dec 3, 2012 5:37 pm
by SCF99
Can some one explain to me what AA 's resoning would be for non-tendering Mr. Wilson. Yes it puts the roster at 39 but it kida takes away the bargining strength of having 4 major league catchers(if you count TDA). But it seems that you at least new you had a relatively strong back up if either buck or JPA were used as trade bait. it seems like it just takes the safety net away from one of the more known strengths in the organization. It seems like all the other teams beat writers are using the jays for trade partners if there team are short on catching talent, and by getting rid of wilson they would than be weak at that the catching postion.
Re: The non-tendering of Bobby Wilson
Posted: Mon Dec 3, 2012 5:45 pm
by Randle McMurphy
Because he's Bobby Wilson and AA could easily just sign Bobby Wilson or another Bobby Wilson-type catcher whenever AA feels like it.
Re: The non-tendering of Bobby Wilson
Posted: Mon Dec 3, 2012 5:49 pm
by LBJSeizedMyID
If you seriously think Bobby Wilson takes away from the Jays bargaining strength of having four catchers then not sure what more can be said
Re: The non-tendering of Bobby Wilson
Posted: Mon Dec 3, 2012 5:59 pm
by The_Hater
Since when did Bobby Wilson become more than a fringe MLB player? I doubt the guy has many MLB at-bats if any left in his career.
Re: The non-tendering of Bobby Wilson
Posted: Mon Dec 3, 2012 7:24 pm
by Randle McMurphy
Randle McMurphy wrote:Because he's Bobby Wilson and AA could easily just sign Bobby Wilson or another Bobby Wilson-type catcher whenever AA feels like it.
And there's your Bobby Wilson-type catcher, Eli Whiteside.
Worry no more.
Re: The non-tendering of Bobby Wilson
Posted: Mon Dec 3, 2012 8:47 pm
by SCF99
Bobby Wilson looks like better ,,cheaper option to have as a an insurance policy in case of a trade.
Re: The non-tendering of Bobby Wilson
Posted: Mon Dec 3, 2012 8:52 pm
by Randle McMurphy
SCF99 wrote:Bobby Wilson looks like better ,,cheaper option to have as a an insurance policy in case of a trade.
Not sure what this reasoning is based on at all. Bobby Wilson is better than Eli Whiteside? Aren't these just scrub backup catchers?
Re: The non-tendering of Bobby Wilson
Posted: Mon Dec 3, 2012 9:03 pm
by The_Hater
SCF99 wrote:Bobby Wilson looks like better ,,cheaper option to have as a an insurance policy in case of a trade.
They're the same player, you're just digging your heals in.
Re: The non-tendering of Bobby Wilson
Posted: Mon Dec 3, 2012 9:33 pm
by Gibby
Randle McMurphy wrote:SCF99 wrote:Bobby Wilson looks like better ,,cheaper option to have as a an insurance policy in case of a trade.
Not sure what this reasoning is based on at all. Bobby Wilson is better than Eli Whiteside? Aren't these just scrub backup catchers?
Yep lol. We can pick these guys up whenever
Re: The non-tendering of Bobby Wilson
Posted: Mon Dec 3, 2012 10:23 pm
by kwamebargnani
Are we talking about Bobby Wilson Bobby Wilson or Buster Posey Bobby Wilson here?