A Little 2012 v. 2013 Payroll Math

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Little 2012 v. 2013 Payroll Math

    In response to redsoxpride34's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    josh johnson would have fit the bill but likw usual ben missed out as he was too afraid to spare his beloved prospects. we should have got reyes and johnson from the jays, but ben couldnt get the deal done. (whats new) zach grienke? sox passed, anibal sanchez? same thing, josh hamilton? passed. all the money saveed from last year has  been put towards worse players. 

    softy despised all of your suggestions, so I don't see how you can say he "hit the nail on the head".


    i was referring to the fact that i agreed with him that the sox have basically wasted all the money they saved and have not assemble a better team. 

    Everyone should agree with that, even the blind squirrel.

  2. This post has been removed.

  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from BosoxJoe5. Show BosoxJoe5's posts

    Re: A Little 2012 v. 2013 Payroll Math

    In response to Softlaw1's comment:

    The problem you that you don't see the players as the product. They are. Once you understand that you won't get jealous over salaries.

    In fact, the problem is that you don't see the players as a lousy product. They are. Once you understand that it's a rip off to pay for a Rolls and get a Volt then you won't be so defensive of the embarrassing falure that is Red Sox Big Labor and the idiots who selected them.

    2013 is a transational year. This team needs the Bogaerts, Bradleys, and Barneses to get here, and last September the Looneys, Valencias and Gomezes weren't Major League talent. This team now has the ability to wait and has Major League Talent.

  4. This post has been removed.

  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Little 2012 v. 2013 Payroll Math

    It's not like there is no connection. You took on hankwilliamsjr's name as a monniker days after his Obama/Hitler statements.

    What on earth does Hank Williams Jr.'s comments aout the simlarity of Obama's fedeal identity politics and Hitler's identity politics have to do wity you comapring me to "Hitler", you pitiful fool.

    The fact that you don't know further proves my point. The timing of your choice of monniker was clear to everyone.

    You inject hatred, bigotry, racism and much more vile drivel than everyone else on this board put together.

    In fact, you merely ape the Leftis words of "hatred, bigotry and racism because you were created in a Great Soceity that gave you a platofrom to do so. In fact, it i you who inject hatred and bigotry and pretend to be some Paul Simon like phony who practices de facto intimate segragation, which isn't "I adoped someone or speak out against the racist founding fathers and Republican Party". 

    You write mighty bold from your ivory tower platform, on the pandered issues of The Great Soceity Welfare State  But you make a fool of yourself when you invoke the name of "Hitler" and ape "hater" and "bigot" like you are some demascluated federal bureaucrat hiding behind censorship..

    No, these words are used with equal vigor by both sides of the spectrum, and you are the best at it.

    You lie and you spread hate. Some choose to ignore. Some choose to explain away your motives. Some flock to your feet because in your world the "trains run on time".

    No, you use this  platofrom to whine like a cry baby "liar, liar pants on fire". You are a childish fool. Why don't you contract Eric Holder and report me as a "Hitler like hater racist (can only mean old whie male racist in your Great Society)

    I never called you Hitler, but your reading comprehension skills probably make you believe that.

     You are one sick individual. 

    No, it takes a sick and pitiful individual to invoke Hitler in regards to a poster on this messageboard, when this is a platform that gives you unlimited license to the province of propaganda. It's not like you actually have to deal with moderators who dont see the Great Society the way you do and what actually force you to engage in a narrative that was limited to "hater, bogot and racist". You coudn't win an open debate if the topic was the history of world slavery and race and race as class idenitty itself, if Obama himself was moderating it.

    More drivel.

    \Get help soon, dude, for your own good and the good of those close to you.

    It's you who need help, "dude". Another meaningless juvenile delinquent word, "dude". Not for your own good, nor for the sorry people who claim to be "close to you but who are actually co-dependent on you". But for he good of, not the failed Great Society, but human society. Lest we be a Nation of whining mental midget drones who seek comfort in aping Leftist buzz words like "hater and racist".

    You can never get better until you admit you have a problem. It appears that will not happen soon.

    Pathetic. I don't use "man up", which is embarrassingly liked by the, ironically, emasculating Left. I'll use the phase "woman up", because you need to stop whining about what someone writes.

    You lie. I expose you. You continue with more lies, diversions, and delusions.

    If you want a debat about any subject, stop hiding behind cowardly buzz words and let the readers decide if they want to read what I have to say or they want to read your licensed blather. And to the extend that some readers want to ready what I write, don't act like Obama and his racial, ethnic, gender and econmoic federal identity class Holder run federal police force. Let 'em read!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 

    A lie is a lie. It is not a buzz word. When you start telling the truth about my positions (and your own past follies), then a true debate can begin. You are debating strawmen and calling them me (and others). 

    Stop the lies. (Wow, I think that's a key buzz phrase of the Tea Party and John Birch Society among other right wing groups, no? Should I change it to "start being more honest"?)

  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from JimfromFlorida. Show JimfromFlorida's posts

    Re: A Little 2012 v. 2013 Payroll Math

    In response to Softlaw1's comment:

    The guy that got 142 mil was worth it at that time based upon other contracts that were given. Just because he did not perform does not make it a bad contract at the time it wears made. Your assessment is hindsight 20/20 vision

    You make my case with your own words. No, he wasn't "worth it at the time". My vision was foreward, while managment's vision was 20/20 backwards. I don't have any doubt that you are unable to know the difference, and neither is the incomptent Red Sox management.

    I do know the difference I'm not sure you know how contracts are negotiated.
    So based upon your comment is any player worth the next contract he signs?

    If you sign a contract with a law firm it is based upon what you have done in the past and the company hopes/believes you can do the same for them in the future.

    every contract is based upon what the player has done and that you hope/believe he will do the same for your team That is how it works.

    But you don't see it that way Do you.

    Btw CC was worth it as he was the best OF that year and had better years than Werth who got almost as much as CC.

  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Little 2012 v. 2013 Payroll Math

    Sorry Jim, but even if CC gave us his career or previous 3 year norm for the first 2-3 years of the deal and then slowly declined with age, he still would have not been worth $142M/7.

    Even at today's prices, would anyone offer him $100M/5 right now? $80M/5? 

  8. This post has been removed.