A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    I'm still waiting for proof Burrito. If you've got it feel free to use it. You guys say things and then YOU DON"T PROVE IT WITH DATA OR DOCUMENTATION.

    Go ahead....PROVE IT. I remember this was all about nothing. I would not wish death on someone. Prove it.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    expitch, I clepped out of college statistics after 6 weeks of independent study in HS. I do freaking understand the math. 
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    I said I would prove my Beltre over Adrian Gonzalez statement. I'm doing it now. For those not at all interested skip the next 10 or so posts. I went through every post I made for the 2 months prior to the Agon deal and I made no fewer than 21 pro Beltre posts on that A Realistic Look at 2011 thread, archive #4, in that time frame alone. I wasn't the least bit wishy washy about it. I wasn't even for Adrian Gonzalez vs Beltre at all in the time period around that deal:

    And by the way, there was an "expitch" back then. It was just another "expitch" with around 350 posts. Apparently more than 1 identity was needed expitch? I didn't see a single PRO Beltre post from "expitch" on that thread in that 2-3 months time frame of that discussion. Here is the only post I saw at all from "expitch" during that time period on that "Realistic" thread archive. Yet another clear example of HS on your part expitch. You didn't even make a single positive post for Beltre at all on that entire thread in that 2-3 month period. In fact, you appear to be against that option. See below:

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part I

    posted at 10/27/2010 6:13 AM EDT
    Posts: 159
    First: 5/4/2010
    Last: 3/1/2011
    In LA, the word is that Arte Moreno is willing to spend
     for Beltre or Crawford, or perhaps both.  But recall that
     he drew the line on Tex. The Angels could have
     the inside track for Beltre simply because
    he would be home.  But don't expect them
    to break the bank for him or for Crawford.
    In fact, FA's seeking bloated contracts may
    be in for a rude surprise, especially ones at
    age 32 or 33 who want long-term deals.  IMO,
     Theo could outbid other clubs ( the White
    Sox, the Giants, the Angels ) for Beltre were
     he so inclined. I doubt that he is.
    Theo might be able to sign Martinez for three years at 
    30-35, but probably won't go any higher or longer because
     he doesn't regard Martinez as a DH or 1Bman down the 
    road.  Nor does Martinez cotton to that idea.  
    Theo could use the money that would have
     gone to Beltre to sign Crawford. That man
     is a ballplayer. In which case, the lineup could look
     like: Crawford,
    Ellbury, Drew, Youkilis, Pedroia, Scutaro, Lowrie, 
    Martinez, Ortiz.  A trade for a 3bman is also
     possible, but realistic deals do not come 
    readily to mind.  I doubt that Theo trades for 
    Fiedler as long as Adrian Gonzalez remains the apple
     of his eye -- but not until at least next July or after 
    the season.  
    That lineup has no big RHed bat ( say, like Werth ), 
    but neither does it have any patsies. It could be a 
    lineup that keeps the parade going and scores its 
    share of runs.  Ellsbury and Crawford would be 
    hellions on the bases, score from first on gappers, 
    and, along with Drew, form a superior defensive outfield.
    I, for one, could live with the lineup.

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    Starting from October 1, 2010:

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part I

    posted at 10/1/2010 9:21 PM EDT


    Posts: 10047
    First: 11/17/2008
    Last: 7/29/2012

    If we think Beltre can replicate this season going forward he 
    would be worth OVER a $100 mil contract easily. It's just 
    that very few teams are going to project that. From looking
     at the numbers, Fenway wasn't even all that great a park 
    for him to hit in. In a Detroit, Milwaukee or Toronto he 
    might have done even better.

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part I

    posted at 10/2/2010 6:37 PM EDT
    Posts: 10047
    First: 11/17/2008
    Last: 7/29/2012
    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part I:
    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part I : , David Wright is better, younger and lets us keep Youk at 1B, who needs A-Gon?
    Posted by YOUKILLUS20


    I must have drunk your coffe this morning Youk
    because Wright is going to cost us some TALENT
     in a trade right plus he doesn't have a cheap
    contract either!
     
    Consider me the President of the SIGN
    BELTRE NOW CLUB!


    JK!



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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part I

    posted at 10/2/2010 6:48 PM EDT
    Posts: 10047
    First: 11/17/2008
    Last: 7/29/2012
    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part I:
    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part I : I think it's difficult to compare Dunn to Gonzalez.  Dunn isn't the face of the Nationals and hasn't been there all that long.  Gonzalez i son the same level and maybe even better than Mark Teixeira and has been the face of the Padres for several years now.  If trading Gonzalez now as opposed to at the trade deadling means getting an additional prospect, the Padres have to consider it. I'll just throw out a potential package... Rizzo, Lowrie, Doubront, Reddick, Kelly That would give the Padres two potential starters on next years team (one guaranteed) in Lowrie and Reddick, a back-end starter in Doubront, a promising prospect in Kelly and another promising 1B prospect in Rizzo. Ontop of everything, the NL west fluctuates more than any other division in baseball.  In the past 5 years, all 5 teams in that division have made playoff appearances.  It's a wide open division and the Red Sox can definitely offer them major league-ready talent for next years Padres team and beyond. Another thing to consider is the number of teams that will go after A-Gon.  There really aren't many fits for need coupled with affordability.  The Red Sox, White Sox, Mets (if they use Davis in the deal), Braves are some of the only teams that come to mind. But the major issue with all of this is Kalish.  If I'm the Padres, I'm trying to get Kalish out of this deal and I'm not sure the Red Sox want to deal him.
    Posted by SoxPatsCelts1988


    We could probably get one year of controlability of Agon
     for any 3 of those players. Agon is not going to cost that
     much. That's a huge chunk of our farm. Possibly 3 of our
     top 5 prospects plus a guy who would start for San Diego
    at 2nd or SS and Reddick who is still an excellent prospect. 

    Plus the guy wants and may get a $20 mil a year contract.
     Why don't we just sign Beltre for less than that and
    get comparable value without having to trade anyone?


    A couple years ago I was discussing the Santana trade
    options and I said I wouldn't trade Lester straight up for
     Johan Santana. People thought I was crazy here but
     we had 5 more years of cheap controlability of Lester
    as compared to 1 for Santana plus Santana was
     older and going to cost $20 mil per year. In hindsight
    it was a good decision right. The same thing could
    well happen here. Rizzo, Kelly and Doubront are
    along with Kalish and Iglesias the crown jewels of
    the farm IMO. We should not trade any of those guys.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part I

    posted at 10/20/2010 4:29 AM EDT
    Posts: 10047
    First: 11/17/2008
    Last: 7/29/2012
    We were 2nd in the majors in runs scored, or
    approximately that level depending upon the
     final numbers in 2010. We did that with all
    those injuries. We can potentially look at
     losing a little offense if it solidifies us in
    other areas going forward.

    It all depends on the dollars involved. If we
     can get Lee for the same money as Beltre
    plus pick up a draft pick would we do it?
     I think probably we would. If it's 90 mil
    and 5 years for Lee or 65 mil and 4 years
    for Beltre I'd go with Beltre.
    It all depends
     on the money but Theo knows that and
     will factor such things accordingly.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part I

    posted at 11/2/2010 7:26 AM EDT
    Posts: 10047
    First: 11/17/2008
    Last: 7/29/2012
    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part I:
    Persoanlly, I'd rather get Beltre knowing we can not expect the same OBP. We'd keep the kids for another day (trade). If Beltre wants too much or wants to live out west, I do think Theo should and will go after AGon (or another top 1Bman that may be available). I do not think SD will want Ellsbury, but who knows.  AGon should be a great pickup for this team, even though it moves Youk to 3B to the end of his contarct (unless he DHs the last year). Other than some way to get HanRam or Tulo, AGon will probably be the top target with or without VMart.
    Posted by moonslav59


    I absolutely agree on Beltre. He should be
    option A over a trade for Agon or some
    other player unless the salary gets out
     of control, which it probably will at
    some point but maybe not.
    We never
     know until we call Boras's bluffs. Can
     we wait until the end of the winter on
    Boras's shennanigans though? That would
     be a problem potentially.

    If we lose the Beltre sweepstakes, we may
     be looking at Lowrie at 3rd and start hearing
    more about Iglesias even this coming spring.
     Very premature but Scutaro is hurt and
    do we want to add another short term SS?
    What this all means to me is that Beltre is
    going to get some very serious offers from
     the Sox. I don't see them waiting all winter
     for him though. If I were Theo I'd resolve
    the Beltre situation by the end of January.

     One way or another.

    I'd resolve Martinez even sooner. An Ortiz
     deal probably getrs done just out of loyalty
     and if it ends up in a year as a
    Lavarnway/Ortiz platoon so be it.

    We can bring back all 3 plus Tek and still
    have at least $10 mil to spend on the pen
    IMO. It all depends on the money though.
     Theo wil set a limit and not go over. He
    often likes to let FA go and take the picks
     but this year at least with Beltre and
    Martinez, I think that would not be the
     ideal approach.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part I

    posted at 11/13/2010 11:02 AM EST
    Posts: 10047
    First: 11/17/2008
    Last: 7/29/2012

    As I have said many times here Moon, 

    I'd rather sign Beltre than do the Agon 

    option this year. We have no prospect 

    on the horizon who can play 3rd

     realistically for us beyond Lowrie. 

    Beltre gives us similar offensive

     production at probably less cost in 

    terms of both money and players 

    with better defense. It's Softlaw 

    driving the Agon train this winter

     as we both know. 

    A strong case could be made for 

    even paying Beltre $20 mil per year 

    rather than trading for and signing Agon.

     Neither option is at all cheap. 

    Can you imagine how much Theo

     is rooting for Rizzo or Anderson to 

    step up considering how expensive 

    a top middle of the order bat can be? 

    Litterally saving us over $100 mil.

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    I have 10 more where those came from. If you want more just ask. There is proof
    of exactly what I said and I don't think it could be more clear, and all this was before I was even remotely aware of Adrian Gonzalez's salary demands or Beltre's. Or the number of years involved. After that point it was even more definitive in favor of Beltre to me.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    And BURRITO / ENCHILADA / TOSTADA or whatever you are known as now, show me the proof or S.T.F.U. You and expitch are all talk and no proof. Expitch ended up being on that thread back then as another identity and he barely even mentioned Beltre. You guys just wasted several hours of my time over ZIPPO.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from EnchiladaT. Show EnchiladaT's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]I'm still waiting for proof Burrito. If you've got it feel free to use it. You guys say things and then YOU DON"T PROVE IT WITH DATA OR DOCUMENTATION. Go ahead....PROVE IT. I remember this was all about nothing. I would not wish death on someone. Prove it.
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom[/QUOTE]


    I get a laugh out of reading your battles with harness last Autumn. I had many battles with him, not much different. Just tryin to get your goat here dude, none of it matters really. Seems a number of us can go at length to attack someone or defend ourselves.

    I am sure moon is in tears seeing his thread turn into a combat zone.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    I didn't think we were at odds Burrito. No problem. That thing with Harness was all HS.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    boom was for an AGon trade the 2 years before we got him and took a lot of flack because we already had Youk, VMart, Kotchman and a guy named Papi who couldn't play in NL parks unless we benched Lowell, Youk or Beltre.

    I will vouch for boom's veracity when it comes to being against the AGon trade and letting Beltre walk in 2011. He did agree with me that we could trade Youk, but his biggest point was to keep Beltre.

    Can we move on with the 2012 Sox and our future, now?
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    If expitch was for the Beltre option, how come not a single post on that subject when we were discussing it for 7 or 8 pages on that thread? Not one.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    I'm through with this. Done. The data is in and it's definitive.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]boom was for an AGon trade the 2 years before we got him and took a lot of flack because we already had Youk, VMart, Kotchman and a guy named Papi who couldn't play in NL parks unless we benched Lowell, Youk or Beltre. I will vouch for boom's veracity when it comes to being against the AGon trade and letting Beltre walk in 2011. He did agree with me that we could trade Youk, but his biggest point was to keep Beltre. Can we move on with the 2012 Sox and our future, now?
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    Yes. Thank You. I most certainly want to move on. Let it stand that my veracity is absolutely proven accurate and if anyone ever questions it again I ask that they prove it. If I am wrong I will admit it.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]I said I would prove my Beltre over Adrian Gonzalez statement. I'm doing it now. For those not at all interested skip the next 10 or so posts. I went through every post I made for the 2 months prior to the Agon deal and I made no fewer than 21 pro Beltre posts on that A Realistic Look at 2011 thread, archive #4, in that time frame alone. I wasn't the least bit wishy washy about it. I wasn't even for Adrian Gonzalez vs Beltre at all in the time period around that deal: And by the way, there was an "expitch" back then. It was just another "expitch" with around 350 posts. Apparently more than 1 identity was needed expitch? I didn't see a single PRO Beltre post from "expitch" on that thread in that 2-3 months time frame of that discussion. Here is the only post I saw at all from "expitch" during that time period on that "Realistic" thread archive. Yet another clear example of HS on your part expitch. You didn't even make a single positive post for Beltre at all on that entire thread in that 2-3 month period. In fact, you appear to be against that option. See below: Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part I posted at 10/27/2010 6:13 AM EDT expitch Posts: 159 First: 5/4/2010 Last: 3/1/2011 In LA, the word is that Arte Moreno is willing to spend  for Beltre or Crawford, or perhaps both.  But recall that  he drew the line on Tex. The Angels could have  the inside track for Beltre simply because he would be home.  But don't expect them to break the bank for him or for Crawford. In fact, FA's seeking bloated contracts may be in for a rude surprise, especially ones at age 32 or 33 who want long-term deals.  IMO,  Theo could outbid other clubs ( the White Sox, the Giants, the Angels ) for Beltre were  he so inclined. I doubt that he is. Theo might be able to sign Martinez for three years at  30-35, but probably won't go any higher or longer because  he doesn't regard Martinez as a DH or 1Bman down the  road.  Nor does Martinez cotton to that idea.   Theo could use the money that would have  gone to Beltre to sign Crawford. That man  is a ballplayer. In which case, the lineup could look  like: Crawford, Ellbury, Drew, Youkilis, Pedroia, Scutaro, Lowrie,  Martinez, Ortiz.   A trade for a 3bman is also  possible, but realistic deals do not come  readily to mind.  I doubt that Theo trades for  Fiedler as long as Adrian Gonzalez remains the apple  of his eye -- but not until at least next July or after  the season.   That lineup has no big RHed bat ( say, like Werth ),  but neither does it have any patsies. It could be a  lineup that keeps the parade going and scores its  share of runs.  Ellsbury and Crawford would be  hellions on the bases, score from first on gappers,  and, along with Drew, form a superior defensive outfield. I, for one, could live with the lineup.  
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom[/QUOTE]
    The key point above is a doubt that Theo is inclined to sign Beltre. I went from there about a lineup based on that assumption. Why linger on what I thought improbable?

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    I will stick by my biggest position I've had since day one of the offseason: 
    We can only be true contenders if we obtain at least a solid #2 starter. 

    It might be too late for 2012, but the same point will be true next yuear as well.

    2012 starting numbers:
                   GS   IP       ERA    WHIP
    Lester   21  126.1   5.49  1.441
    Beckett 17  108.1  4.57   1.274
    Buch      17  107.2  4.93   1.402
    (I expected the big 3 wouldn't all stay healthy & have good years, but...) 

    Doub     19   107      4.54  1.402
    Bard      10     54       5.30  1.620
    Cook        7     40       4.50  1.125
    Morales   5     26.1   3.42   1.139
    Dice-K     5      23.0   6.65   1.348

    While Cook & Morales have done well in the 4-5 slot this year, our problem was never starter depth or who will be our 5th starter. One of these guys was bound to do well enough in that role. 

    The issues were the big 3, the facts that Doubie, Bard, and others could never give us 33 starts and 190+ IP individually, and that 8 starters who could be good 3-4 starts is not a winning formula. (Actually, Lester, Becvkett and Buch were expected by most to be good #2 types this year, if healthy.)

    7 of 8 starters are over 4.50. No starterwith over 7 starts has a WHIP under 1.274. It was worst case scenario almost from top to bottom, except for Doubront, Morales and Cook.


     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]If expitch was for the Beltre option, how come not a single post on that subject when we were discussing it for 7 or 8 pages on that thread? Not one.
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom[/QUOTE]
    I've told you more than once that you are looking in the wrong place. You need to find at least one post where I agreed with you by name that the Sox should have kept Beltre. I never challenged your claim that you were for the Beltre option. Never. Not once in our long dispute. 
    IIRC, in a post somewhere, I said that Beltre had learned to go the other way, made the pitchers happy, and had found a home in Boston.  Does that sound like someone who was content to see him go? But it was obvious that go he would, and that older players might have trouble securing long contracts. I was wrong. Texas gobbled Beltre up. I also believe that I said somewhere that Beltre is built to last. 
    It doesn't matter that I did not chime in when the 7 or 8 pages were going on. I never claimed that I did. I said only that I "was on your side."  And said that explicitly somewhere along the line. 

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]I'm through with this. Done. The data is in and it's definitive.
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom[/QUOTE]
    You've made your case, if the subject is Salty. Others have made theirs. As Moon says, let's move on.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III : Yes. Thank You. I most certainly want to move on. Let it stand that my veracity is absolutely proven accurate and if anyone ever questions it again I ask that they prove it. If I am wrong I will admit it.
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom[/QUOTE]
    Fine, but how about the veracity of the people ( plural ) you called liars or supporters of liars. Do they get any relief? Or just remain anonymous scoundrels. I can understand why you'd want to move on from that kind of accusation. 
    Your veracity on preferring the Beltre option has never been questioned. On this question, who are you defending yourself against? 

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]expitch, I clepped out of college statistics after 6 weeks of independent study in HS. I do freaking understand the math. 
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom[/QUOTE]
    No one said that you didn't understand the math. The issue was your use of "objectivity" in connection with statistical information. I questioned an understanding of the concept. I cited places where nowadays learned people question use of the concept and the term. Indeed, the questioning has been going on for some time, back to the Greeks at least. ( See Heraclitus. ) But it has become especially pointed in the age of quantum physics and the principle of "uncertainty." 
    Big difference between questioning your knowledge and introducing complications about how that knowledge is developed and put to use. And thus claims to making use of "objective evidence." The arguments along these lines are intellectually bracing. They even make one think about definitions of reality.

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    Now let's take Moon's advice.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    I'll take the first step in moving forward.
    The victory on Saturday afforded the Sox a little but not much breathing room. A victory today would add a few breaths. But the Sox need a big turnaround soon in order to have a realistic chance of making the playoffs. 
    Moon is correct to warn against a rental pitcher, especially if the cost involves any of the top-tier prospects. More to the point, are any of the pitchers reportedly available that much better than what Boston already has?  That seems doubtful.
    Primarily, Beckett and Lester need to step up and Buchholz continue his promise.
    And all three need to stay healthy. Moon's concern that there would be injuries and sub-par performances by the Big Three was well founded. At this point, the hope is that most of those doldrums are behind the club. But it's only a hope. Unless the three remain healthy and effective, the Sox will not make the playoffs. Beyond those three, Doubront will probably stay in the rotation until he hits an innings limit, to be replaced by Morales. Cook probably continues to round things out. Even if most of the hope is realized, will it be good enough to vault the Sox over several ( that's the key ) teams now with a leg up on Boston?  A tough order.
    There could be lineup changes, especially if a trade or trades involve position players. But at the moment it doesn't seem that the Sox will trade either Salty or Lavarnway. Nava at this point doesn't figure to bring much. Nor does Sweeney, save perhaps for a couple of lower prospects. Hard to see the Sox trading Ross while the FO thinks the club is still in the mix. ( Does the FO really think that? ) A trade involving Crawford would need to involve several players, one would think, and be VERY creative. ( See some of Moon's possibilities. ) That pretty much leaves Aviles. Ciriaco could replace him, but it doesn't seem like Aviles would bring players of immediate value -- unless part of a package. Much more likely, IMO, is that the Sox will stick with Aviles until all hope is lost, and then have a long look at Iglesias. 
    Gonzalez is on a roll -- the long ball too. But Ellsbury and Pedey need to start getting on base more to take advantage of Gonzo's resurgence. Middlebrooks is starting to become dangerous. Crawford -- well.... Maybe he should just have the surgery and then get ready for ST. Who then in left? Still Nava? Posednik? Linares? Salty, if still around, brings pop. Shoppach, if still around, is adequate as back-up, and has been better than expected. Catching is not a problem.
    Like Moon, I'm not ready to write the Sox off, but I'm not aglow with optimism. Just about everything has to break right and stay right if this club is going to compete for a playoff spot.  It needs to go on a run quickly to get itself mentally and psychologically in shape for the stretch. 
    The next four games will be telling if not definitive. One more over the Yanks and at least one over Detroit would seem a minimum requirement. Or if they lose today, two over Detroit. The team is playing the big boys and needs to prove to itself that it can hang with them. 
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    I'll write the Sox off...sorry, not enough consistency with the SP. They should start seeing something more though out of the offense once Ortiz returns. I think you will see more of these 8-6 type games, but the Sox won't always be the one on top.
     

Share