In Response to Re: I'm done with Ortiz : Your pettiness gives me a headache. The point was; he started two consecutive years with significantly long slumps and his manager backed him. Maybe you missed that. If you want to nitpick and point out 5 weeks here, 8 weeks there, go right ahead and have your fun. When someone, anyone goes to such lengths to grasp at thin stats it shows who really has an agenda. I was working off of memory, and was off by a few weeks for one of the years, does that really invalidate my point? It did to you, and that's sad. You must work for the IRS to be so exacting all the time. Seriously, that's absurd. As for the DH, yes, Youk is the obvious choice. As was my reasoning to NOT sign Crawford, part of it at least, you DON'T NEED OVERPAID PLAYERS AT EVERY POSITION! "Scrapheap" players have worked out better than the high priced ones: Bill Mueller Mike Lowell Ortiz HIMSELF (splitting time with Jeremy Giambi when he got here, lest we forget) Nick Swisher for the Yanks (everyone laughed at 9mil per and the thought of him as a starter) Will Middlebrooks is the supposed future over there, is he a year away? 2? More than that? I'd honestly rather piece it together for a year or two and wait for the kid than run Youk out there the next 2 years and have nothing left of him. I've said for a few years the way he plays is going to catch up with him, and it is. Moving him to DH will extend the amount of time they can get some use out of his very capable hitting. Basically I prefer Youk/DH and ??/3B for the next 2 years over Ortiz/DH and Youk/3B. If that's the plan, it's going to be ??/3B for at least 80 games over two years anyway. What's the point? And to have a declining Ortiz? He put up big numbers in a contract year...yeah, nobody has ever seen that before. And those older players ALWAYS produce after getting that one, last contract, right? Awesome plan. Plans like that land Crawford for 7 years and 142million. Not only is he 30, he's an old 30 having already logged ten seasons. How many guys are their most productive in seasons 11-16 of their careers? Maybe years 11/12 are towards their best, but not the last 4, and it's usually 4-10. 100 years of baseball history shows you that, and yet...7 years/142 million for a 29 year old, 9 year vet. Ugh. At least LEARN from the mistakes!
Posted by ma6dragon9
Oh how I love posts like yours. You twist everything Ortiz has done and paint it in the worst possible way and I'm being petty.
You don't like Ortiz anymore, fine. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.
-- Breaks in on Francona interview ... ignoring how Pedroia said it was all a joke.
-- Decides he's a pitching expert (Aceves) ... and interprets it as throwing Francona under the bus. I didn't see anything inflammatory. He was just expressing his opinion
-- Whine multiple times (long term deal) ... painting it when whining when he was simply answering reporter's questions. What was he supposed to do. Not answer? Then everyone would accuse him of moping and pouting because of his deal. He answered honestly, and none of the stories had any legs because he didn't make a big deal of it.
You also posted that he shouldn't talk anything but hitting because he's a DH. Really. He's in the lockerroom, he knows the players an as a hitter, he knows about good pitching and bad pitching, but he should just talk about hitting. So my your standard, why are you discussing major league baseball players. Have you ever been a MLB player. No? So, again, to use your standards and your words, I don't know why you feel the need to open your mouth. You don't field, You don't pitch. You don't pinch run. He!!, you don't even hit.
You also wrote, Ortiz is consumed with Ortiz.
Now everything above opinion, but I didn't call you out on any of it. I just pointed out how you exaggerated facts. That give insight to the rest of your post. If you're exaggerating on the facts, then it's hard to take your opinions serious. And yes, not getting the facts right does invalidate your point. Because it shows you're just flailing out on emotion instead of crafting a well-reasoned statement. What sad is that you feel you can just make things up as you go along -- basically lie -- and expect to be taken seriously. Now that's what absurd. (And there is a big difference with slumpiing bad for eight weeks one year and four weeks the next, especially the four-week slump slow start was the most recent one).
I don't work for the IRS, but in my job I am expected to be accurate with everything I do. I don't know what you do for a living, but it must be nice to just be able to go through and make things up as you go along. When someone has to exaggerate the facts to try to support their opinions, it shows who has an agenda.
You painted everything about Ortiz in your post in the worst possible way, but I'm the one with an agenda? Wow, after this weekend with my UCF blowing the game against BYU, with the Sox losing the first two games against the Yankees and the Patriots blowing it against the Bills, I needed a good laugh. Thanks.
(Laughing again) You start a thread "I'm done with Ortiz," yet I'm the one with an agenda. Geez, it's been a long time since I've been able to laugh this much. Again, much thanks.
As for the rest of the post above. I agree about not overpaying at every position. I posted a couple of years ago that I didn't think the Sox should sign Crawford at a time when this board was filled with posters saying the Sox should sign him when he becomes a free agent. I hated Crawford's contact when he was signed and I hate it now.
I didn't want the Sox to become the Yankees of the 2000's. When they won in the late 1990s, they did it with guys like Paul O'Neil, Tino Martinez and Scott Brocious (sp?). When they replaced those guys with the Gary Sheffields, Jason Giambis and A-Rods, they stopped winning W.S. I've always said you need a balance. I've criticized other posters who feel the Sox need to have an All-Star at every position.
But Youk being an obvious choice at DH? How do you figure that? Some guys can't adjust. He does have an advantage of being able to play some 3B and 1B, but it also doesn't mean he won't get hurt. He played 1B the last two years and still ended up on the DL in both years.
Ortiz has been in the top five in OPS and could end up with another 30-100 year. From strictly a batting standpoint, I'd rather have that bat in the lineup. It is reasonable to ask if Ortiz can still put up those numbers the next year or two because of his age. That where the discussion should be centered on, not all the other noise you threw in because at the end of the day, you're not in the lockkeroom so you don't know how well Ortiz has Francona's back.
And for that matter, there are no guarantees that Youk would stay healthy and put up strong numbers strictly as a DH. Still, I might buy your arguement about Youk at DH with a different 3B if you actually named a 3B.
Really now, you don't see how ridiculous you sound saying you'd rather have a no-name whom you have no idea how well he'll perform instead of one of the top five hitters in the game?
And again, you're statement ''he (Ortiz) put up numbers in a contract year" is again twisting things to paint him in the worst light, making it sound like he's been horrible the past two years, sitting around waiting for his contract year to start hitting again. Yes, he struggled agianst lefties last year, but overall, there was nothing wrong with his numbers last year. And the only thing wrong with his numbers two years ago was his BA. And because of the first two months, his power and RBI numbers are even more impressive.