Jitterbug Jake is driving the Red Sox offense

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Jitterbug Jake is driving the Red Sox offense

    In Response to Re: Jitterbug Jake is driving the Red Sox offense:
    In Response to Re: Jitterbug Jake is driving the Red Sox offense : Fool my blog is open to the public. I do not try to limit my viewers, as I allow all who are open-minded to listen to what I have to say. The reader being able to understand and follow what I say, is another matter I don't need Obama's Blog Czar to control who can see important information.
    Posted by bettersoftthanlaw


    Folks, what you are witnessing is split-personality dementia. The individual behind these identities is splintering.

    Both of these nutcases are of one. Make no mistake. This clown has used similar diversionary tactics to hide from his next ban. It's part act, part psychosis.

    Both "bettersoftthanlaw" and "Billyboy" are coming off the same keyboard.
    Bet on it.

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

    Re: Jitterbug Jake is driving the Red Sox offense

    In Response to Re: Jitterbug Jake is driving the Red Sox offense:
    In Response to Re: Jitterbug Jake is driving the Red Sox offense : Fool my blog is open to the public. I do not try to limit my viewers, as I allow all who are open-minded to listen to what I have to say. The reader being able to understand and follow what I say, is another matter I don't need Obama's Blog Czar to control who can see important information.
    Posted by bettersoftthanlaw


    Do you enjoy talking to yourself?
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Jitterbug Jake is driving the Red Sox offense

    In Response to Re: Jitterbug Jake is driving the Red Sox offense:
    The last 10 games make Kemp a more desirable target, and Ellsbury a more desirable trade bait.
    Posted by billbyboy


    UR last 10 posts make you a prime candidate for the b-o-o-b-y hatch brigade.

    Sick, psychotic mind. I can't believe you are allowed out without a keeper.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Jitterbug Jake is driving the Red Sox offense

    The "real softy" mispells and mistypes often.

    In order to captiously belittle another poster's misspelling, one must first be abe to spell "misspell". Softy was a great poster, never fearful of being censored by the NY Times. Too bad he's gone, as we are left with the dim witted drivel of Moonslow and Harnut. I hear Softlaw now has his invitation only blog, which gets more daily visits than the 2 viewers of Rachel Mandow

    I wasn't "belittling" you for misspelling and typos. I have many of my own. I was just trying to point out to the person who was trying to expose your imposter based  on a typo was not sound reasoning. I guess you are too "out of it" to even notice my intentions.

    WAR is not a valid player value appraisal. Francouer is a one trick pony who doesn't have a contract extension because no smart gm would ever pay him 5 to 7 M to sit half the time.

    Francouer is making just $2.5M this year, so only about $1M is due this year. There is a $4M mutual option for 2012, but the deal for Francouer would be for the RH'd OF bat we need this year. Hopefully a longer term one will be found for 2012. With Reddick and Kalish banging on the door, a nice RH'd and much cheaper platoon type RF'er makes more sense.

    His career OBP is .310 and he is a punch and judy corner of'er. His 2010 V. LHP slugging % was .442. Not very impressive for a guy that does little else on platework.

    You raved about Coco's distant past "pop" and all he had was a 15 and 16 HR seasons. Jeff has a 29 HR season once and a 19 and 15 also. But, it's not about his overall numbers. It is what he does vs LHPs that matters most for us in 2011. He has been very very good vs RHPs for 3 years, but I know you prefer career numbers when you do not agree with someone's point. Here are Jeff's career numbers based on a 650 PA full season vs just LHPs: .299/.344/.493/.838 with 25 HRs, 40 2B/3Bs and 100 RBIs. I'll take that punch and Judy hitter over JD, CC, or any OF'er on the Sox right now.
     
    Long term, bidding for or extending Francouer is poor value and fit for a player who has weak market demand for a reason. he is in a the right market.

    No need to extend.: just give a couple of midlevel prospects and use Jeff wisely for 2 months. 

    Francouer and Pence are the favorite names to fix the Crawbust OF construction flaw. The reason is not value or fit, it's to retain Ellsbury short and long term and add a face that reflects the pride and prejudice of most Red Sox fans

    It's your prejudice and inflated pride that has been exposed.. 

    Kemp, J. Upton and McCutchen are the only types of skill set profiles who are value and fit to repair the Crawbust OF construction flaw


    You really believe only 3 OF'ers fit the need? (Don't answer: cut your loses).

    I'd love to see the reception McCutchen would get, if he took Bellsbury's place

    I have been advocating McCutchen for over a year. You ridiculed me for mentioning him last winter. You really are a clown!

    The reality is that when Theo bought Crawford, he was effectively painting himself into Bellsbury's long term replacement. There is no way to pay both, long term, as the current Francouer dumpster dive and OF v. LHP patently manifests

    You don't have to convince me about Crawford's faults and the mistake it was to sign him. "I was the leader" on advocating not signing him. I placed less value in his worth than you, when I said TB would not miss him and you called me a fool for saying so.

    Right now, Theo is having to lie to the fans and claim he's trying to extend Bellsbury and wants to keep him. For the first time, he called him a core member. This is to placate the prejudices of the fanbase. The truth is that Theo replaced Ellsbury with Crawford, long term. Bellsbury is gone unless Crawford is unable to return to the lower ranges of his career standard deviation splits

    Ellsbury is gone because of Bora$$, not because of Theo. If he followed your advice, we'd have traded Ellsbury long ago and missed his "unforeseen" improvments. It's laughable to think of all the names you wanted straight up for a guy you said would never get over .335 OBP or hit over 12 HRs (unless he played LF)

    In order to avoid a 2nd GM malpractice complication on the heels of the 142M Crawbust contract, Theo must not allow fan prejudice to get in the way of locking up long term on a young slugging star profile like Kemp, J. Upton or McCutchen. If he allows fan prejudice to run out the trade value arbitration clock on Ellsbury, he will be guilty of allowing emotion to dictate baseball business decisions in a Lowell and Wakefield ceremonial fan favorite gifted roster spot fashion

    Why are your only 3 players worthy of replacing Jake nonwhite? Why do you keep bring up the "good ole boys" Wake and Mikey? It's your prejudice that continuously appears.

    Kemp's name, infra, can be replaced by a similar profile if that profile is a better current market value. Unlikely, given the fact that Dodgers are most certainly out of it this year, no chance they sign Kemp beyond 2012, and the Dodgers are currently big sellers who need a new narrative. A blockbuster trade would give them that and improve their balance and depth and current and future construction. 

    1. The Dodgers will trade Kemp for Ellsbury and 2 or 3 non-elite prospects/players.

    2. Kemp will agree to an extension at 18 to 20M base x 7 years (to age 33)

    3. Kemp will only cost about 2M more for 2011

    4. Kemp will agree to a middle load his extension to create a lower than 2011 budget fexibility over the near two years

    5. Theo or his successor is not going to extend or bid high for Ellsbury FA

    6. Ellsbury's value is currently inflated and will only fall from here out

    7. Ellsbury is a better current and long term fit and value for the Dodgers

    8. Kemp is a better current and long term fit and value for the Red Sox

    If Ellsbury is as bad as you say he is, why would LA want him? He can't field. His "cheap HRs" in Boston will all be outs in spacious LA. SBs are over-rated. He runs into too many outs. Bellsbury has a huge weakness vs LHPs. He's punch and judy.

    The worse thing Theo can do is to continue to vacillate under pressure to run the Ellsbury clock out and appeal to fan emotions for a long term deal for Ellsbury. Crawford is a move that cannot be undone, nor should it be now that the mistake has been etched in stone

    He could pay a team some of CC's contract and undo his worst mistake as a GM. He could trade 3-5 prospects for Kemp and keep Ellsbury as well. Why is it that every option you have ever discussed involves trading "JakeK? (Don't answer: we know). 

    A blockbuster deal helps both the Dodgers and the Red Sox, short and long term

    Wrong and wrong

    Crawford will improve once Ellsbury's fan adoration vacuum is gone. Neither Crawford or Kemp will be as popular as Ellsbury, Lowell, Wakefied and Varitek, but so what. The Red Sox will be a better team now and in the future. Crawford's role will change to the only role he is suited for. Being told to simply get on base and forget trying to slug to a 142M #3 hitter
    . tune. Being the #6 hitter is embarrassing on many levels

    I'd love to have McCutchen on this team. I'd love to have Kemp on this team. I'd be willing to trade top prospects to make either happen, buta trading Ellsbury right as he is entering his prime and replacing him with a .330 (at best) OBP as our leadoff hitter is just plain ludicrous. Pittsburgh is not likely to be sellers this year. LA is likely to look to a 2-3 building process (same as SD) if they choose to become sellers. They would not extend Ellsbury or sign him when he becomes a Bora$$ FA. Jake is not a "fit" for LA. He is a perfect "fit" here in Boston. Here in 2011. Next year in 2012. Again in 2013. 


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

    Re: Jitterbug Jake is driving the Red Sox offense

    In Response to Re: Jitterbug Jake is driving the Red Sox offense:
    The last 10 games make Kemp a more desirable target, and Ellsbury a more desirable trade bait.
    Posted by billbyboy

    Almost everyday you say Jake's trade value is at its highest. By now, even Felix Hernandez straight up, could not be possibly worth the ever rising value of Jake if we followed your mathematics.

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

    Re: Jitterbug Jake is driving the Red Sox offense

    In Response to Re: Jitterbug Jake is driving the Red Sox offense:
    The last 10 games make Kemp a more desirable target, and Ellsbury a more desirable trade bait.
    Posted by billbyboy



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

    Re: Jitterbug Jake is driving the Red Sox offense

    He means, based on 10 games, it would be easier now to trade Jake (after his gamewinning hit tonight) for Kemp (after a bad 10 games).

    It's hard to understand clown logic, but I think I am beginning to see the method to his madness.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from ctredsoxfanhugh. Show ctredsoxfanhugh's posts

    Re: Jitterbug Jake is driving the Red Sox offense

    I don't know If I wanna jump back into this thread or just keep reading it and laugh. 
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Jitterbug Jake is driving the Red Sox offense

    In Response to Re: Jitterbug Jake is driving the Red Sox offense:
    He means, based on 10 games, it would be easier now to trade Jake (after his gamewinning hit tonight) for Kemp (after a bad 10 games). It's hard to understand clown logic, but I think I am beginning to see the method to his madness.
    Posted by moonslav59



    According to a recent retort, Softnut "manages billions".
    (God help us). My guess is, he sees players as market-type commodities.
    That alone creates a fan division - and a subsequent bias.
     
  11. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Jitterbug Jake is driving the Red Sox offense

    In Response to Re: Jitterbug Jake is driving the Red Sox offense:
    "Belittling" is a word, for a captious poster who is not a very good liar. And, no, you did not place a lower value on Crawford, nor did you intensely object to his contract.     

    Hey fool. All my posts are still here. I was always against the CC deal. I have said he is nothing more than a glorified platoon player. I said even if he gives us his 2010 season times 7 years, the deal still stinks. I said the deal would cripple us for years to come. It's all still there, unlike your lies and back-tracksYour lies are getting bolder and bolder. You claimed CC would be greatly missed by TB. I said he wouldn't. You want CC to be our leadoff hitter, even now. I have said he shouldnt ever bat leadoff and shouldnt bat higher than 6th vs RHPs and 8th vs RHPs.  Sounds like you "value" him more than me. I have advocated trading himand eating what it takes of his contract. Sounds like I value him more than you? I think not! You want to promote him to leadoff! You! The guy who has roasted Jake for a low OBP wants a guy who has had just one "blip" of a high OBP his whole 10 year career. An OBP (.364) that is still below Jake's now! You bring up jake's OPS vs LHPs, but ignore CC's horrible splits. Get real, clown. You value him way more than I do.

    How about those Rays, not going away and everything, upon which you started multiple threads of pontification. 

    Unlike you, I am OK with not having to think I need to be perfect to be a man. I thought TB would win 90-92 games. Right now, it looks like I will miss by about 4-5 games. 

    It's not surprising that you favor paying Ellsbury 12 to 14M to FA, based upon one season. It's called the Crawford pinciple.   

    Lies. Find where I said we should sign him. I have said he will likely walk. I have never said a single word about signing him and never mentioned any dollar amount. You just lie, lie, lie. Show me a quote you clown!

    So, your plan is to pay Bellsbury 12 to 14 M and Francouer platooner 8 to 10M for 2012 and 2013. 


    You can't stop the lies. I exposed your claim that Francouer makes $5-6M. He is due about $1M from here on out. He has a mutual $4M option for 2012. I never said I wanted him extended. I said he'd be dirt cheap to get and would offer a very capable RH'd bat to platoon for Reddick or Crawford. We'd have Jake and a better offensive RF and all our top prospects. Jeff can play elsewhere next year. Jake can walk after 2 1/3 more seasons, unless we can get more for him than his worth. You have gone on and on about his value never being higher for about 2 1/2 years now. It keeps rising. You misjudged his prime production and based your trade proposals on wishful thinking, faulty understandings of how teams rebuild, and neglect the fact that other teams know he has Bora$$ as an agent. You assume other GMs are as dumb as you. 

    My plans is to pay Kemp 20M and Reddick/Kalish virtual zero. 

    Your plan is 1.3 years of the headcase Kemp plus 3-4 top prospects and 2.3 years of prime Jake. 

    1) LA does not want a Bora$$ FA to be. They'd want cheaper players. that's why it's called a "salary dump" fool.
    2) I have no problem shedding prospects, but not to open one hole to fill another.


    Moonslow's Plan: 2012 Crawford 20M Ellsbury 7M Francouer/Reddick0 4M = 31M 2013 Crawford 20M Ellsbury 7M platoon or FA ?  

    The Francouer 2012 option is mutual: look up the meaning clown. My 2011 plan is Crawford by default (although, unlike you, I have said we should eat part of his deal and trade him), Ellsbury, Reddick/Francouer. 2012, would be to find a guy like Francouer but better or cheaper.

    5M = 32M 2014 Crawford  20M Ellsbury 20M? platton or FA? 5M = 45M  ?  108 M 3 years 2015  Crawford 20M           ?              ?                     My Plan: 2012 Crawford 20M Reddick/Kalish 0 Kemp 20M = 40M 2013 Crawford 20M Reddick/Kalish 0 Kemp 20M = 40M 2014 Crawford 20M Reddick/Kalish  0 Kemp 20M = 40M     120 M 3 years    2015 Crawford 20M Reddick/Kalish 3 Kemp 20M = 43M     Your plan has ? for 2013 and beyond, and pays Ellsbury 12 to 14M to become a FA and which time you give him a Crawford contract or you look elsewhere or just make it up year to year.

    My plan is to keep Ells until we get a deal worthy or realistic enough to consider or get the draft picks when he walks. My plan is to keep our best players in their prime, not sell low and watch them tear up the league on another team. My plan was never to sign CC. You want him to lead off. My plan was to not waste money on poor CERA catcher that can only catch 1/5th of the games even now. My plan is to expose your lies and continue to root for the best team in MLB.
    Posted by billbyboy


     
  13. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Jitterbug Jake is driving the Red Sox offense

    Your proposed deal for Kemp is not realistic, just as your deal to SD for AGon was even more unrealistic. 

    I'd love Kemp here, but LA would want cheaper options (yop prospects) and I don't think we have the pieces they want.

    Your "tabloids" on Jake last year beats "The Enquirer".

    I'm not prejudiced against headcases. I want him hear, even though one time he drove by in his truck and I heard rap music blaring misogynist rants from his car stereo.

    Wink
     
  15. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Jitterbug Jake is driving the Red Sox offense

    You mean "no pop" Jed?

    Keep on digging your deeper hole.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Jitterbug Jake is driving the Red Sox offense

    Such Crawford Hate. His ears are burning!
     
  18. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Jitterbug Jake is driving the Red Sox offense

    I hope he proves me wrong, but unlike Jacoby, he has a 10 year career sample size that shows he should be a platoon player who can kill RH'ers only. Yes, he is "in his prime", but on the back side soon.
     
  20. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Jitterbug Jake is driving the Red Sox offense

    BTW, Jitterbug Jake had a 2 run knock tonight to lead the Sox to victory yet again. And open up a 3 game lead on the dreaded Yanks.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Jitterbug Jake is driving the Red Sox offense

    Started by a key two-out single by Tek.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from SonicsMonksLyresVicars. Show SonicsMonksLyresVicars's posts

    Re: Jitterbug Jake is driving the Red Sox offense

    In Response to Re: Jitterbug Jake is driving the Red Sox offense:
    In Response to Re: Jitterbug Jake is driving the Red Sox offense : Folks, what you are witnessing is split-personality dementia. The individual behind these identities is splintering. Both of these nutcases are of one. Make no mistake. This clown has used similar diversionary tactics to hide from his next ban. It's part act, part psychosis. Both "bettersoftthanlaw" and "Billyboy" are coming off the same keyboard. Bet on it .
    Posted by harness


    I'm not so sure....Billy is definitely Softlaw, but I think Better is a parody.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Jitterbug Jake is driving the Red Sox offense

    I think "parody" is beyond the realm of softy's brain capacity.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from ctredsoxfanhugh. Show ctredsoxfanhugh's posts

    Re: Jitterbug Jake is driving the Red Sox offense

    Softy has already began to realign his position, ever so slowly he will say that HE is the one who said Ellsbury should be star!
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share