Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 3 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Tee Higgins MONSTER year ON DECK
#46
(08-03-2023, 01:21 PM)Soonerpeace Wrote: You make great points. And I’m not disagreeing with the validity or rationale. But if Joe, Tee, and Chase take less money than their market value to make it work then it’s all moot. Ownership will sign all 3. It’s what Joe wants. End of story. Again I’m not arguing the validity of what you are saying. I’m just stating where I think we are headed. JMO they aren’t risking making Joe unhappy and if all 3 agree to reasonable salaries it’s what is going to happen. Could it be the wrong decision? Sure it could. But today at least we don’t know that signing all 3 to favorable contracts won’t work either.

Of course it's not unreasonable if all 3 take less than market value, or structure to make it work. 

That remains to be seen though. Why hasn't Burrow or Higgins been announced yet, if it's so open and closed?





[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]

"The measure of a man's intelligence can be seen in the length of his argument."
Reply/Quote





Messages In This Thread
RE: Tee Higgins MONSTER year ON DECK - J24 - 08-03-2023, 02:55 AM
RE: Tee Higgins MONSTER year ON DECK - rfaulk34 - 08-03-2023, 01:59 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)