A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    I can't remember the last time the Red Sox won 10 in a row... even if it were recent it just always seems a rarity.  They have the 2nd best record in baseball... and I cannot recall the last time they struck me as so dominant.

    Boston could actually manage to have their best record in decades.... it is possible.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from betterredthandead. Show betterredthandead's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Burrito, the key will be if the following players stay healthy and effective:

    Pedroia
    AGon
    Ortiz
    Youk
    Lester
    Buchholz
    Beckett
    Papelbon
    Bard

    The rest of the cast can be replaced with something from the farm that is adequate, but those names cannot be replaced with anything that is adequate.
     
    Harness is a vacuous mind who uses childish name calling to substitute for his lack of a meaningful thought. Boomerang is part of the 3 ring circus, but he's not the bully that the other two are.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    So glad childish name-calling isn't a part of your social graces.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from betterredthandead. Show betterredthandead's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHFkDVIvBks

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Boomer, "you do not yet realize your importance. You have only begun to discover your power. Join me, and I will complete your training. With our combined strength, we can end this destructive conflict and bring order to the," forum... BurritoT

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Now working on the grounds crew at Vanderbility University, but with singing words of wisdom in his former life:



    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jr2hM-mPhhY

    2nd cousin, once removed, of Ray Knight
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Must you two use this thread as your cesspool?
    Did you really think Boom would swallow UR BS?

    Move over Boom. Now I'm getting sick.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from jidgef. Show jidgef's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Boom, get well and don't stay away long; you're a good poster. Although we do disagree on Victor. I love him as a hitter, but we already have a pretty good DH, and that's really all Victor is, a DH. I may not go to the "God-awful" description of him as a catcher, but he was/is pretty bad behind the dish. If he were still here, I think Tek would be the odd man out and Salty would be the back-up and the team would not be doing nearly as well.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    Boom, get well and don't stay away long; you're a good poster. Although we do disagree on Victor. I love him as a hitter, but we already have a pretty good DH, and that's really all Victor is, a DH. I may not go to the "God-awful" description of him as a catcher, but he was/is pretty bad behind the dish. If he were still here, I think Tek would be the odd man out and Salty would be the back-up and the team would not be doing nearly as well.
    Posted by jidgef


    Depends. If they could have signed VMART off their initial proposal (appx. 16 mil for two years), that's DH money/PT catcher.

    In that instance, the team might not have spent the 13 mil on Papi, and Salty
    Tek would still have there present roles, with VMART insurance as a 3rd receiver  who be the FT DH.

    This is how VMART would be deployed correctly. The drawback is the possibility that Papi could be doing what he's doing in pinstripes.

    The team simply chose to overspend on Papi for a year as opposed to tying up VMART for 4 years.
    Of course, there's no way VMART was gonna commit to 8 mil a year, so the whole point is moot.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from jidgef. Show jidgef's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Once the season ended Harns, they had a week (I believe) to pick up Papi's option or not. And once that was done, VMart's usefulness to the Sox was drastically reduced.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from betterredthandead. Show betterredthandead's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Ortiz wasn't an overspend. Crawford is.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    I know Jid, but they offered VMART that 'mock' two year deal  before the season ended.

    I agree, once they opted for Papi's return, it meant VMART had to return as a FT catcher, or he was out. Putting this 200 million dollar staff into his hands for 4 years would have been a huge mistake.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from betterredthandead. Show betterredthandead's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Putting 142 M into Crawford's hands is a huge mistake.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    what, you can't rip Wakefield, so now jump to Crawford? Bandwagoning critique guy. Fits with your style of exiting when the guys you rip do well. Of course, you probably blame the end of the winning streak on your whipping boy. Of course, the whipping boy changes from thread to thread, from post to post, so naturally anything you post is considered jibberish.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    He's allergic to fair play and honesty.
    Comes from being born into opportunity.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from betterredthandead. Show betterredthandead's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    All people are born with opportunity, but some are born with deep seated resentment and giant chips.

    I was clear that Wakefield did not pitch well. He faced one of the worst offenses in baseball, and he was hit hard but dodged some bullets and still managed to walk 5 hitters and throw a wild pitch. Investing time in him is a waste of time. Wakefield needs to get off the stage and allow the time to go to the younger players climbing the ladder.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    I said born into opportunity, not with opportunity. Huge difference.
    You are absolutely correct. Some people are born with deep-seated resentment

    and giant chips...
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    To return to baseball, I find it interesting that the team is suddenly deploying a 6-man rotation to keep Miller happy, and from opting out of his contract.

    They must really prize him or fear losing him to go to this extreme.
    Why, just last year they demoted Wake after a very strong outing vs. Baltimore - to placate Dice - and avoid a 6-man rotation. And they stayed with Dice through his  few initial horrid outings, (7.89 ERA) while Wake cleaned floors.

    Why not demote Wake again? Twinge of conscience???
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    harness, i'll say it once, twice, three times a lady, and I'm sure you may be the only person who partially agrees with me....What exactly did Tim Wakefield do to fall in disfavor with his manager and GM other than pitch pretty much how he has in his MLB career. All last year I had to grin and bear it from even moon (who clearly felt the best Tim could do was be limited in his number of starts 20-25) that Wakefield wasn't able to be a regular rotation pitcher anymore. It was a decision made by the Sox when they signed Lackey and didn't remove Dice-K. This whole thing about insurance policy was solely created by the Sox FO/Manager.

    Wakefield's starts this year have even been limited by Tito in the number of pitches Tim throws. It's like they think he's this fragile guy who needs to be coddled, watched and micro-managed. I keep saying pitch him, let him go, let him go 9. If Tim thinks he can throw like he did in 2003-2009, and he surely has no health issues since coming back from his back surgery (took him a while to get his running shoes on so to speak, and may have affected his overall performance in 2010), then there is no reason to worry about him going every 5th day.

    People are making these type of statements in Sox Nation:
    "wow, never thought Tim had it in him."
    "I guess I was wrong about him."
    "I thought he was done."
    "He seems to have made a comeback."

    A comeback from what? He got removed in the rotation, but it wasn't based on performance. I still insist it was all about the numbers...you can't fit 6 pegs into a 5-peg box. So he was the odd man out. Plain and simple. Now what moon totally is in agreement on is that he was shuffled like no other Sox pitcher over the last 25 years. In, out, in, out, in, out from either the rotation, the pen, the mopup duty (remember 21 days without seeing the hill after serving up a 1-pitch game-HR to lose the Texas game, even though he faced a guy who was hammering the ball to start that late inning, and even though he should have been in that game 3 pitchers before he entered). People want to cite his ERA, yet he always has a great WHIP and solid batting average low against. How many times even this season has his ERA taken a beating over some questionable scoring calls and inherited runners due to Tito's fear that Wake would lose it any second.

    So he throws 119 pitches in Tropicana. He's now thrown for the first time since 2009 I think pitched four straight starts without an interuption by a spaced start or a bullpen outing or being removed because someone came back from the DL. He had a couple of rough starts last year right before Dice-K came off DL. Tim's history is if he throws a few bad starts, he comes back and throws 6 of 7 quality starts. Lackey was being perceived as this stalwart quality start, innings eater guy, and yet Tim served that role many a time over the years. I guess age discrimination became Tim's enemy.

    Anyway, leave Tim alone, and let him pitch. That's all I have said, been saying, and been chirping to non-believers now for years and years and years. The guy is an ancient warrior who keeps on chugging along. No reason to alter it.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Gentlemen, did you ever think after dismissing the 5 man rotation out of hand last year, that maube the RS are debating that logic again in the face of getting to watch the pro and cons with the White Sox?

    Also, so far it is one of those "according to a MLB source" not even a "RS source".

    Last, if that happens so much for everybody in RSland except Francona appreciates Wakefield. That move would totally be Epstein and the FO not the field manager.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    pot calling the kettle black on "mental case," no?

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    I said born into opportunity, not with opportunity. Huge difference. No, harness, there isn't any difference. You are a mental case with a huge chip of resentment that has been running the Nation in the ground since entitlements welfare were started.
    Posted by betterredthandead

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from betterredthandead. Show betterredthandead's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    No, using hackneyed phrases is de facto brain death.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from ampoule. Show ampoule's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II



    I'll miss you Boom.  I think you're a good guy.

    Nice catcher insight, Jid.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from ampoule. Show ampoule's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II


    As far as Miller goes, you can't enough pitching on a team.

    Who knows who will have the next sore elbow or whatever.  We've seen it already.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    I said born into opportunity, not with

    opportunity. Huge difference. No, harness,

    there isn't any difference.
    You are a mental case with a huge chip of resentment that has been running the Nation in the ground since entitlements welfare were started.
    Posted by betterredthandead


    Yes claude, there's a huge difference, one to which you are convieniently blind.

    Example of being born into opportunity:

    Southern plantation owner enslaves human beings. Becomes wealthy and powerful in his circles. Out of this comes desire for political power, and the resulting corruption. Then the kids are born into this circle of influence, shielded from the degrading origins. They don't know the meaning of having to grind it out on their own. Everything is given to them.
    And it can easily affect morals and create deep-seated resentment.

    Example of being born with opportunity: A gifted child. May come from lower or middle-class family. Works his way through school and earns scholarships.
    America is about creating a landscape for such opportunity.

    But only a minority of Americans are born into wealth and opportunity.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share