Add new comment

The front office can give the M's a fighting chance w/o shelling out $160M (or there-abouts) for Fielder.
But business is business, guys.  If the M's see $160M invested in Fielder as bringing no significant return, then why would you expect them to do it?  Because they owe it to us?
C'mon. 
There are lots of teams out there who aren't playoff teams next year and they aren't bidding on Fielder and it doesn't mean the front office has no desire to win next year or any time soon.  It just means that Fielder's cost is too steep for their budget/plan/vision.
Evidently the Angels had a ton of cash to toss around.  More power too them.  It might be boatloads of cash well spent, it might not help them win a pennant or a World Series at all. 
I think that if we get too critical of the M's because they refuse to put 160 (or whatever) million eggs in one basket then we're forgetting the risk that such a move entails, as well.
I hope we sign Fielder, but if we don't there are still ways we can win.  Refusing to spend all that cash for one player is less concerning to me than paying a lot of stupid cash to Figgins or Silva. 
Thumbs up for signing him, if he fits the M's cash plan.....or if it can be stretched to fit him. 
moe