A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III : Team played .667 with Tek starting. Team played .503 with Salty starting. Direct reflection of how much better pitching staff did with Tek. Whose spikes will replace that?
    Posted by harness



    This is ridiculous. How many games did Tek start down the stretch? Why was he not the full time catcher? 

    Its like saying we had the best offense in the league by looking at the numbers and then being reminded we were 2-72 after the 7th inning when behind. Totally deceptive.

    Unbelievable with the plain fact that we need to really shake-up the team you still are chirping about Tek and Wake. 

    Your outlook on the team right to the last pitch was wrong. Tek barley caught his share of the load in the end and the offesne he offered had all but evaporated. Wakefield gave up 5 runs every singe start since August, and yet you claim he is a solid contributor.

    It would be obvious to me that you would not make any changes this winter and would end up bringing on the same problems next year with even worse results.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    They should take a look at making Bard a starter, and sign a couple of decent last 2 to 3 year metric veterans to one year deals. (softy)

    Name 4 guys you think should be considered, and who would take one year deals. I'll save your response for next year's laugh of the year.
     
    You keep saying these pitchers are available everywhere. yes, there are the Garcias , the Colons, and the Aceves, but they are hard to pick. Let's hear yours...
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III : This is ridiculous. How many games did Tek start down the stretch? Why was he not the full time catcher?  Its like saying we had the best offense in the league by looking at the numbers and then being reminded we were 2-72 after the 7th inning when behind. Totally deceptive. Unbelievable with the plain fact that we need to really shake-up the team you still are chirping about Tek and Wake.  Your outlook on the team right to the last pitch was wrong. Tek barley caught his share of the load in the end and the offesne he offered had all but evaporated. Wakefield gave up 5 runs every singe start since August, and yet you claim he is a solid contributor. It would be obvious to me that you would not make any changes this winter and would end up bringing on the same problems next year with even worse results.
    Posted by BurritoT


    My final outlook was one I made quite clear to you: The team was a boxer on rubber legs...and that I would go down with the ship before I would bail.
    Before that, as always, I hold on to any possible sign of hope. Comes with the territory of supporting one's team. Recall, I'm the one who saw the earmarks of many pitching issues 5 months ago, and I felt much of it was directly related to Young.

    Why Tek catches 40% of the games is due to his age. Why he wasn't played more down the stretch is one Tito can answer. If you try hard enough, you may catch him before he takes his flight out of Boston.

    There's nothing deceptive about team winning 67% of Tek's starts. It covers over a decade where team plays 100 points better with him catching any RedSox staff healthy.
    Nor it there a deception about team record trailing after 7 frames. It rivals that of other teams, albeit a bit worse. It's no more deceptive than the fact all Boston opponents went 1-77 trailing after 8 frames facing the RedSox.
    It's about an era of specialists.

    Before replacing anybody, it's good idea to have the replacement. And replacing a 200-game winner who provides starter insurance at this point has been tried and tried and tried. Fact is, there will always be a need for pitching depth.

    As for making changes, I wouldn't make changes for the sake of making changes.
    I would definitely pitching coach, as I feel toward him the way you do toward Lackey or Wake. As for player personal, I would approach it with a level head. Get the best deal possible. Over-reacting to fan/press anxiety is a recipe for disaster. 

    Take it one step at a time and the pieces will begin to fit.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III : I just think it's time to break in someone new. IMO it's time to let go of the past and start looking to the future. I think that future is probably Lavarnaway, he has nothing left to prove in the minors anyway. Please don't take this as a slight, because I think Tek has been the best catcher the Sox have had since Fisk, but I also think it's over for him. I personally would like to see what Lavarnaway could do with the big club.
    Posted by carnie


    Carnie, I don't take it as a slight. Why would I? I see Tek as a huge asset to the pitching staff. Nothing more. Many facets of his game have slowed with age.
    I'm not blind to that, which is why I seldom comment on his hitting.

    As for breaking in someone new, they did that with Salty. I don't agree with you about Lavernway having nothing left to prove in AAA. He needs to show he can work a pitching staff. I have no doubt he'll be given his chance, but it needs to come at a time when he can come close to replacing Tek or Salty, or Papi for that matter, and not before.

    You may opt for him now, but what will you think next April or May, if the pitching slides when he catches, and/or if his bat is suddenly exposed?
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from carnie. Show carnie's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III : Carnie , I don't take it as a slight. Why would I? I see Tek as a huge asset to the pitching staff. Nothing more. Many facets of his game have slowed with age. I'm not blind to that, which is why I seldom comment on his hitting. As for breaking in someone new, they did that with Salty. I don't agree with you about Lavernway having nothing left to prove in AAA. He needs to show he can work a pitching staff. I have no doubt he'll be given his chance, but it needs to come at a time when he can come close to replacing Tek or Salty, or Papi for that matter, and not before. You may opt for him now, but what will you think next April or May, if the pitching slides when he catches, and/or if his bat is suddenly exposed?
    Posted by harness
    Probably what I thought about Pedey when they brought him up, which is why I hope that whoever the next manager of my favorite baseball team is, he'll have more patience than I typically do.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    I would never use the Rays  model  to draw a comparison. They got to monopolize the league's best picks. They get to play in a pitcher's venue with little pressure of expectation. A far cry from playing in Boston. There's about 10-20 teams in the same boat as TB:none have done as well as them, many with higher budgets. In addition, I think you over-estimate the Rays FO. They inherited rich farmland and have little choice but to sell high on those they can't afford. I'm willing to bet you Theo's moves would also be viewed as "uncanny" if he had to market Lester or Pedey or Bard or Paps or Jake  - and got the low-cost goods in return. You missed my point completely. If Pedey, Lester, and Youk were dealt instead of ectended, they would have gone on to have good years. The Tb players have not. It could be a fluke, but it seems to be "uncanny" how nearly everyone who leaves TB seems to decline sharply almost immediately. Yes, TB's current management inherited some good young players, but they have a large percent of their players on this year's roster that were drafted, traded for, or signed as FAs by the current GM. Besides, Theo inherited a stacked team as well, and was given the money to sign some key players. Theo also was given HanRam and Sanchez who were dealt for Beckett and Lowell. He used DanD's kids to trade for Schill, etc... The Rays are clearly "the model" for small market teams. They are even becomming a model for all teams. They have made some great draft choices. They have a stacked farm system thanks to current management. They locked up Longoria for sick low money. They have Shields locked up until 2014 at decent money. They continually create a new capable bullpen from scratch and for peanuts.  Maybe Theo should have traded some of our "stars" for some great kids "just in time". I also think perception of Wake/Miller as inadequate depth beyond the front 5 is short-sighted (read this from others). They filled in and were very serviceable for a time. They are not paid to replace Buch/Dice/Lackey. Long-term injuries, coupled with short-term ones, coupled with an inefficient sounding board will result in free-fall. Maybe we should consider how long the team was able to withstand losing so many arms for so long. This was the first season in my memory that I did not say "build our staff from the top". I did want Cliff Lee instead of CC, but it wasn't going to happen no matter what we offered. I thought we had good depth. Realistically, a GM can't stockpile starters. The good ones need to pitch. The journeymen have limited value. Ya can't just put #6's and #7's on the shelf. I have no problem with seeing Lackey, who is likely to continue to have physical issues if I read this year right, in the #5 slot, with a guy like Tazawa and a low-cost journeyman and Douby or Bowden returning to staters in AAA next year for insurance. If we have just Tazawa, Douby, Weiland and Bowden as out 6-9 starters, we are in big trouble. I think we'll see one main acquisition to replace Dice, but that's about it. And I have no problem bringing back Wake for starter ins. He was healthy and gave the team several QS's, which is all one can ask from a "#6". You spent much of the season effectively comparing Wake to other spot starters or other #5's. No reason to stop that analogy. Show me any team that can withstand losing the amount of starts this team lost.  I'm all for having Wake back at $1-1.5M as out 6-8 starter, but I want another starter who is not a typical #4/5 type. I think the chances are greater than not, that one of Beckett, lester or Buch will get hurt or have an off season next year. If that happens, we will need more than lackey, Taz, and the kids to pick up the pieces. Ikeep saying "if we stay healthy" we can win. I still believe half of that: we could have won if 100% healthy, but I realize now, the chances are slim we ever will be even 90% healthy. I doubt we'll see a repeat of that. But making moves to insure against it may turn out to be  very  costly, and I'm  not  limiting this to $$$. Buehrle would make the commish happy with expedited games, but his stuff is pretty straight and his H/IP don't translate well to Fenway. Guthrie is a better bet, regarding both venue and health gamble. But it's all a gamble. Guthrie will cost players and open new holes, but I do like him better. You could be right about Buehrle: he might be the next Lackey. in about the same amount of innings in Fenway, Buehrle has a 4.95 ERA and Guthriea 5.88 ERA. (5.06 at NYY)
    Posted by moonslav59


    We will never agree on Rays "model". 10-20 teams were not ever in the same boat as the Rays. They didn't dwell in the cellar for 10 years like Smelly. New mgmt. had the constant leverage of the farm and revenue sharing for player movement. Most every player new MGMT. has is directly or indirectly linked to old mgmt.

    I also doubt their pitching would be as effective playing in Fenway for 81 games under very different degree of pressure.

    Lackey is lower rotational pitcher. If backed by an arm to replace Dice, and perhaps a low-cost gambit, I think Wake & Miller (w/new pitching coach) and Tazawa/Douby/Bowden is all the team will realistically stock.

    I'm not a Weiland fan, and I expect he and Bowden or Douby to be packaged with Lowrie this winter. Guthrie's numbers don't reflect what I think he can do in a winning atmosphere. I've always liked his stuff, but it's predicated on what he's got behind him.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    We will never agree on Rays "model". 10-20 teams were not ever in the same boat as the Rays. They didn't dwell in the cellar for 10 years like Smelly. New mgmt. had the constant leverage of the farm and revenue sharing for player movement. Most every player new MGMT. has is directly or indirectly linked to old mgmt.

    They started with less than Theo did. They had way less money to spend on filling holes with FAs. They made shrewd trades over the last 4 years. Theo's trade and FA signing record since 2008 is not very good.

    I know no other team had as many top picks as TB for so many years, but many of the player's who helped build this team were not the #1 picks.

    I also doubt their pitching would be as effective playing in Fenway for 81 games under very different degree of pressure.

    They'd certainly have higher ERAs and WHIP, but these kids are seasoned. (their hitting would look better if they played in Fenway as well.) Yes, there is added pressure playing in Boston, but these kids have mostly done great under pressure. They have exceeded expectations and overachieved in many areas, year after year. I don't see how you can't accept that they are a "model of success".  

    The Rays did have a nice 4.04 ERA on the road, which included many games in hitting parks like Fenway, Yankee Stadium, and Baltimore. Their overall ERA was 3.58 with a WHIP of 1.219.
    Vs the Sox: 2.88/1.065 (In Fenway: 2.85/1.051)
    Vs the NYY: 3.85/1.377
    Vs. Tor 2.79/1.083
    Vs. Balt 3.86/1.193

    vs teams over .500: 3.41 / 1.226
    vs teams under .500: 3.77 / 1.212

    The Rays drafted 10 guys in the top 60 picks this year. They drafted 12 in the top 89. On paper, they should have got a lot worse this year by getting all these picks for losing top quality FAs. They barely blinked an eye. They had 5 of the top 79 picks last year.
    This management team drafted Hellickson (4th round), Longoria (#3), Alex Cobb (4th round), Desmond Jenning (10th round: watch this kid next year!)David Price (#1), Niemann (4th round). 
    They also signed Carlos Pena off the scrap heap to a minor league deal in 2007.
    This management team traded some good talent drafted by the old management team, but they did very well picking up good players in nearly every deal:
    Junk for Edwin Jackson, then traded Jackson for Matt Joyce
    Seth McClung for Balfour 
    Ty Wiggington for Wheeler
    Delmon Young, Brendan harris and J. Pridie for Garza & Bartlett.
    Kazmir for Sean Rodriguez, Alexander Torres, and Matt Sweeney.
    Garza> Sam Fuld, Robinson Chirinos, Brandon Guyer, Chris Archer and Hak-Ju Lee
    Aubrey Huff for Ben Zobrist
    Bartlett for 3 relievers in this year's MLB pen: Gomes, Ramos &Russell


    Lackey is lower rotational pitcher. If backed by an arm to replace Dice,andperhaps a low-cost gambit, I think Wake & Miller (w/new pitching coach) and Tazawa/Douby/Bowden is all the team will realistically stock.

    I agree that's what they "will" do, but think they need better to overtake the Rays or Yanks.

    I'm not a Weiland fan, and I expect he and Bowden or Douby to be packaged with Lowrie this winter. Guthrie's numbers don't reflect what I think he can do in a winning atmosphere. I've always liked his stuff, but it's predicated on what he's got behind him.

    I like Guthie too, and mentioned him this past July.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from 1958lesspaul. Show 1958lesspaul's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    His quest for 200 exemplified all that was wrong with the team... and if you are not even willing to get rid of the 45 year old pitcher how do you expect the team to improve?

    Correct.

    Provide the link where Drew missed "games" due to a hang nail.

    Laughter is one name, you and your insurance of Lowell and Wakefield.



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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    I will when you provide the link to Ellsbury's 40% more "fat balls".

    You mean the same Lowell you said in March of 2010 should platoon for Papi, then spent a year bashing me for wanting anyone with better numbers vs LHPs to platoon for Papi in some games in 2010?

    By the way, Drew missed more games than Jed.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    We will never agree on Rays "model". 10-20 teams were not ever in the same boat as the Rays. They didn't dwell in the cellar for 10 years like Smelly. New mgmt. had the constant leverage of the farm and revenue sharing for player movement. Most every player new MGMT. has is directly or indirectly linked to old mgmt. They started with less than Theo did. They had way less money to spend on filling holes with FAs. They made shrewd trades over the last 4 years. Theo's trade and FA signing record since 2008 is not very good. I know no other team had as many top picks as TB for so many years, but many of the player's who helped build this team were not the #1 picks. I also doubt their pitching would be as effective playing in Fenway for 81 games under very different degree of pressure. They'd certainly have higher ERAs and WHIP, but these kids are seasoned. (their hitting would look better if they played in Fenway as well.) Yes, there is added pressure playing in Boston, but these kids have mostly done great under pressure. They have exceeded expectations and overachieved in many areas, year after year. I don't see how you can't accept that they are a "model of success".    The Rays did have a nice 4.04 ERA on the road, which included many games in hitting parks like Fenway, Yankee Stadium, and Baltimore. Their overall ERA was 3.58 with a WHIP of 1.219. Vs the Sox: 2.88/1.065 (In Fenway: 2.85/1.051) Vs the NYY: 3.85/1.377 Vs. Tor 2.79/1.083 Vs. Balt 3.86/1.193 vs teams over .500: 3.41 / 1.226 vs teams under .500: 3.77 / 1.212 The Rays drafted 10 guys in the top 60 picks this year. They drafted 12 in the top 89. On paper, they should have got a lot worse this year by getting all these picks for losing top quality FAs. They barely blinked an eye. They had 5 of the top 79 picks last year. This management team drafted Hellickson (4th round), Longoria (#3), Alex Cobb (4th round), Desmond Jenning (10th round: watch this kid next year!)David Price (#1), Niemann (4th round).  They also signed Carlos Pena off the scrap heap to a minor league deal in 2007. This management team traded some good talent drafted by the old management team, but they did very well picking up good players in nearly every deal: Junk for Edwin Jackson, then traded Jackson for Matt Joyce Seth McClung for Balfour  Ty Wiggington for Wheeler Delmon Young, Brendan harris and J. Pridie for Garza & Bartlett. Kazmir for Sean Rodriguez, Alexander Torres, and Matt Sweeney. Garza> Sam Fuld, Robinson Chirinos, Brandon Guyer, Chris Archer and Hak-Ju Lee Aubrey Huff for Ben Zobrist Bartlett for 3 relievers in this year's MLB pen: Gomes, Ramos &Russell Lackey is lower rotational pitcher. If backed by an arm to replace Dice, and perhaps a low-cost gambit, I think Wake & Miller (w/new pitching coach) and Tazawa/Douby/Bowden is all the team will realistically stock. I agree that's what they "will" do, but think they need better to overtake the Rays or Yanks. I'm not a Weiland fan, and I expect he and Bowden or Douby to be packaged with Lowrie this winter. Guthrie's numbers don't reflect what I think he can do in a winning atmosphere. I've always liked his stuff, but it's predicated on what he's got behind him. I like Guthie too, and mentioned him this past July.
    Posted by moonslav59


    Theo didn't have much farm depth to work with. But he had a team in tact and Henry's wallet. Theo then built a farm with far less top picks than did the Rays FO.
    But both had something very concrete to work with. And both made it work.

    I'm not putting down the Rays for their accomplishments. In fact, I agreed with UR take on them early on. I'm simply saying that when you look at the team model, don't think it began in 2008 or 2006. It began at inception.
    What the FO did to attain those top picks is not the way to run a business.

    It looks good now in that it reaped fruits after a decade. But I think there was a better approach to fielding a competitive team only 28.6 % of their existence.
    The current mgmt. has made shrewd trades and drafted well. There's just no way anything they did can be separated from what inherited. The same can be said for Theo's reign. No difference.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from 1958lesspaul. Show 1958lesspaul's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    You mean the same Lowell you said in March of 2010 should platoon for Papi, then spent a year bashing me for wanting anyone with better numbers vs LHPs to platoon for Papi in some games in 2010?

    No, the Lowell I wanted released before theh 2010 season after it was revealed he was injured and washed up.

    BTW, for someone who wanted Ortiz released or sitting v. LP, Ortiz was one of the team leaders v. LP. 
    By the way, Drew missed more games than Jed.

    BTW, Jed missed more games than Drew over the last 2 years. BTW, Drew is mid 30's and Lowrie is in 20's. 
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Some thoughts:

    I think CERA has an impact but I generally look at it as under .5 runs per game. To have more impact than that would make a defensive catcher worth more by far than any other player on the field. In other words, other teams would be offering us Pujols for Tek with that kind of impact and we all know that isn't even being contemplated for a nanosecond. Think about it. Over a run a game just doesn't make sense. Such a player would have a 30 WAR.

    I respect the posters who feel that way but it just doesn't pass the logic test. For example, Tampa Bay is putting up tremendous pitching numbers in the AL East with Shoppach and Jaso behind the plate. I'm not buying that those 2 guys are bigtime pitch callers, pitch framers...etc. A lot of time it's just luck or coincidence. Every guy they throw out there seems to pitch well. Is it Jaso the wunderkind who just came into the league last year ( if I remember correctly ) or Shoppach, our cast off?

    I like Tek when he brings a guy like Buchholz along early in his career. He keeps things simple. He is prepared. He oozes leadership and of course he has been a great pitch caller. He's just not worth over 1/2 run a game in the real world.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    I was recently casticized here for making an allusion to the real suspicions regarding PEDS and Bautista in regard to it's impact on the MVP vote. Not a single one of you said anything positive to note that just maybe, that position wasn't irresponsible. It went on for 10 pages of threads and it was nothing but crickets. Now many of you are speculating about one attitude problem in the clubhouse after another with virtually no substantiation at all. And no one says a thing.

    Ortiz? Wakefield? Lackey? Youk? Beckett? Crawford? I think I've heard 10 or so names discussed here and we know virtually nothing about the real situation in the clubhouse and no one says a thing.

    Where is the moral indignation now? Our conscience, expitch, doesn't say a thing when we are REALLY being irresponsible here. It doesn't appear to fit his agenda I guess.  

    Here is my point. We really do not know the situation in the clubhouse. If real issues occurred there, it could be someone we would never guess. My guess is that it is not Crawford.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    I've given some thought to roster issues. It would seem to me that guys like Bowden, Lowrie and others are going to be moved. Bowden is out of options. He either makes the team as a keeper reliever or he's gone. I like that kid a lot and think he can have a decent career and wish him the best. That doesn't mean I'm projecting him as an  all star by the way. I just think he can have at least a Del Carmen type career with several years of decent performance in the majors. 

    Lowrie is at a point where he is going to start costing some real money and I think they probably would be better off keeping Aviles and Scutaro. I like Lowrie but we do need more durability and he seems to have recurring issues. Does anyone at this point think he can be a reliable starter, playing more than 140 games a year? It's not likely at this point. We effectively need 2 back up MIF when we have to count on Lowrie. I didn't feel that way until this year but the recurring shoulder issue seems to not be going away. 

    Scutaro. That's a tough call isn't it. $6 mil is a lot of moulah but given the market conditions and that he is available in a one year deal, I think we pull the trigger on that one. We hope Iglesias still emerges ( I think he will ) and I don't think we want to pay Reyes well over $100 mil. If anything, I think we have maybe learned our lesson on that one. As great as he is, he has difficulty staying on the field and that is a lot of cash. 

    Tek is an solid value at $2 mil. At the same time, that supplementary Type B pick is worth a lot also, maybe $3-4 mil in itself. Studies have shown, if I remember correctly, that a #1 pick can be worth as much as $8-10 mil. One thing we can count on at this point is that Tek is probably going to hit under .230 going forward and he goes through periods of a month or more of being an automatic out. We need to move forward and now is a good time IMO. We may be in for a house cleaning and the good might get thrown out with the bad. That Type B pick is coveted and Lavarnway is probably ready as a solid back up receiver at this point. One that just maybe has a middle of the order bat by the end of the year. 

    We need something like that to emerge. In case some here haven't noticed yet, Tamba Bay may be even better next year. What if New York slots Fielder at DH? We need to get better and there may not be a lot of opportunities for that in the FA or trade markets. Replacing our .230 hitting starting catchers with maybe a .270-.280 guy with 25 HR pop and 70-80 points higher OBP would be huge. The kid can even throw out runners better, IMO. My main concern with Lavarnway is his blocking skills. If pitchers can't throw splitters because he can't block them, it limits us. Guys like Papelbon end up throwing nothing but fastballs and we all know where that sort of predictability ends up.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    [QUOTE]I was recently casticized here for making an allusion to the real suspicions regarding PEDS and Bautista in regard to it's impact on the MVP vote. Not a single one of you said anything positive to note that just maybe, that position wasn't irresponsible. It went on for 10 pages of threads and it was nothing but crickets. Now many of you are speculating about one attitude problem in the clubhouse after another with virtually no substantiation at all. And no one says a thing. Ortiz? Wakefield? Lackey? Youk? Beckett? Crawford? I think I've heard 10 or so names discussed here and we know virtually nothing about the real situation in the clubhouse and no one says a thing. Where is the moral indignation now? Our conscience, expitch, doesn't say a thing when we are REALLY being irresponsible here. It doesn't appear to fit his agenda I guess.   Here is my point. We really do not know the situation in the clubhouse. If real issues occurred there, it could be someone we would never guess. My guess is that it is not Crawford.
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom[/QUOTE
    More bush league sarcasm, your stock in trade: "our conscience, expitch...."
    You were castigated for how you made the allusion and let it stand.  Readers knew that. Perhaps that is why none of them came to your aid and one of them took issue with you.  On another thread, he castigated you deservedly for making remarks you said I deserved -- in your febrile mind maybe. 

    I would not call Moon "no one." He has advised caution. 
    FYI, on the Sox AOL sports message board, I also advised caution until there is more information, credible information, about problems in the clubhouse.
    Still up to old tricks  even as they continue to fail -- topped off by more bleating, more pathetic appealing to the audience. 

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    It's going to sound bad but I would like to state that I think I was actually the first one here to state that "Tampa Bay is not going away" and I projected TB for one more win than Moon. Maybe I'm wrong but I think I started that discussion. Moon agreed immediately but it was something we both projected. This is definitely not intended to disparage Moon, who has more respect from me than anyone here, but it wasn't just Moon who projected TB as a probable concern in 2011. For the record. 
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    I was recently casticized here for making an allusion to the real suspicions regarding PEDS and Bautista in regard to it's impact on the MVP vote. Not a single one of you said anything positive to note that just maybe, that position wasn't irresponsible. It went on for 10 pages of threads and it was nothing but crickets. Now many of you are speculating about one attitude problem in the clubhouse after another with virtually no substantiation at all. And no one says a thing. Ortiz? Wakefield? Lackey? Youk? Beckett? Crawford? I think I've heard 10 or so names discussed here and we know virtually nothing about the real situation in the clubhouse and no one says a thing. Where is the moral indignation now? Our conscience, expitch, doesn't say a thing when we are REALLY being irresponsible here. It doesn't appear to fit his agenda I guess.   Here is my point. We really do not know the situation in the clubhouse. If real issues occurred there, it could be someone we would never guess. My guess is that it is not Crawford.
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom


    Again with the no one, us, we...
    I have said plenty about the degrading witch-hunt on this board.
    You are right to bring attention to it. I just started a thread to further UR point.
    It's as misplaced as groundless PED finger-pointing.
    No difference.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    harness I hardly follow your CERA posts at all but any one time I might take a peek on what you have to say I don't think I have ever seen you mention any alternatives to Tek.

    Have you mentioned before or have you ever bothered to present a list of younger more viable options outside of the organization? 
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    It's going to sound bad but I would like to state that I think I was actually the first one here to state that "Tampa Bay is not going away" and I projected TB for one more win than Moon. Maybe I'm wrong but I think I started that discussion. Moon agreed immediately but it was something we both projected. This is definitely not intended to disparage Moon, who has more respect from me than anyone here, but it wasn't just Moon who projected TB as a probable concern in 2011. For the record. 
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom


    Nice of you to put yourself above the masses. Perhaps Softone can e-r-e-c-t a statue to you, after he's finished with his own...
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III : Again with the no one, us, we... I have said plenty about the degrading witch-hunt on this board. You are right to bring attention to it. I just started a thread to further UR point. It's as misplaced as groundless PED finger-pointing. No difference.
    Posted by harness


    I agree on Crawford. Chances are he has been keeping his head down in embarrassment most of the year.  I hope the heck he can re-master what made him a good player only a year ago because we will need his bat and his speed.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    harness I hardly follow your CERA posts at all but any one time I might take a peek on what you have to say I don't think I have ever seen you mention any alternatives to Tek. Have you mentioned before or have you ever bothered to present a list of younger more viable options outside of the organization? 
    Posted by BurritoT


    I mentioned a couple of possibilities last year in the event the FO took a different direction. It was more in line with the fact most catchers won't compromise a staff the way a rookie would...or one known for his hitting prowess over handling a pitching staff. Toronto's Buck showed power and credibility with his pitchers.
    Rob Johnson is a great handler of pitchers, but has a weak bat.

    Fact is, until they sport the uniform, an accurate analogy really can't be drawn.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from orr4neely8. Show orr4neely8's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Should I stay or should I go :      Back Up:

    Line Up:                                 Kalish, Iglesias, Aviles, Lavarnway
    Elsbury    CF
    Pedroia    2B
    Gonzales  1B
    Ortiz       DH
    Crawford  LF
    Scutaro   SS
    Lowrie     3B
    Redick/McDonald  RF
    Stalalamachhio  C

    Trade:

    Papelbon Youk Beckett for prospects or bullpen help

    Pitching:

    Starters:
    Lester Lackey Bucholtz Bedard ( trade beckett youk papelbon for a consistent starting pitcher or bull pen help/or hitting prospects)

    Bull Pen:
    Aceves Wakefield(set up) Jenks(closer) Weiland Wheeler A. Miller T. Miller Bard (closer)Matsuzaka  (set up)

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    I want to know more about Miguel Montero - I like what I hear there.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Are you talking about him replacing Salty as a FT catcher?
    Or a tandem?
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Wouldn't you say that if we had a Montero or McCann that Salty would be nearly non-factor. It would not matter if he stayed or went. Perhaps we need to get back to the days of one horse, and Salty may or may not be that guy.

    Anyhow like McCann the Diamondbacks would be crazy to get rid of him.  I learned one thing from fantasy ball this year, catchers are far and few in between.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share