Justin Upton on the block, expected to be moved, should the sox trigger a deal for him?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: Justin Upton on the block, expected to be moved, should the sox trigger a deal for him?

    In response to toccooa's comment:

     solid #1/2

    There are no "Solid #1" pitchers on the market. As for solid #2, 2nd rate pitchers should not be signed to first rate contracts.



    Unfortunatly this is usually how FA works.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Drewski5. Show Drewski5's posts

    Re: Justin Upton on the block, expected to be moved, should the sox trigger a deal for him?

    Southpaw and Carnie,

    I agree with you that acquisition cost should be the deciding factor re: bringing Upton in.  However, considering that he is coming off a down year, it may be a good opportunity to buy low.  At 23 years old , he finished fourth in MVP voting.  If we have to pay the price (in prospects) that a 23 yr old MVP candidate would command (the entire farm and then some), I'm weary (as are you).  However, if the asking price has come down due to his off-year, I'm very interested.

    He has monster talent, and is a bounce back candidate.  This could be a great buy low opportunity.  The price that I suggested: 2 top prospects, 2 mid level prospects would not get it done for a 23 yr old MVP candidate (not even close).  Therefore, if they accept this deal, we are indeed buying low.

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

    Re: Justin Upton on the block, expected to be moved, should the sox trigger a deal for him?

    If softy was the GM, we'd never sign anyone, since his suggested offers are usually 25-30% of what FAs end up signing for.

    A review of softy's 2012 plan:

    Sign Ramon Hernandez for more than $6.4M/2 that CO payed him.

    Move Bard to starter and keep him there all year, since he was doing a "decent job" there.

    Sign scrub starters to $1M/1, like we did with A Cook. That worked well.

    Keep Scutaro, the guy softy called a journeyman UT IF'er when we signed him. His contract would have prevented us from signing Ross (a guy he called a "dumpster dive"), Shoppach and Padilla, and we'd have no Mortensen now, and Scoot would be bolting as a FA.

    Cut Wake & VTek as Ben did, and we can see how much the team improved with those 2 moves he's been clamouring for 4-5 years over.

    Fire everyone.

    Looking to 2013: We'd still have CC, Beckett, Punto, and yes AGon. We'd have a Loney/Gomez platoon (since his 1st 2 choices are pipe dreams). We'd have Pods leading off, anyone but Ells in CF, and the dream of Upton in RF, since his trade proposals are not close to what AZ wants or needs.

     

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Drewski5. Show Drewski5's posts

    Re: Justin Upton on the block, expected to be moved, should the sox trigger a deal for him?

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    If softy was the GM, we'd never sign anyone, since his suggested offers are usually 25-30% of what FAs end up signing for.

    A review of softy's 2012 plan:

    Sign Ramon Hernandez for more than $6.4M/2 that CO payed him.

    Move Bard to starter and keep him there all year, since he was doing a "decent job" there.

    Sign scrub starters to $1M/1, like we did with A Cook. That worked well.

    Keep Scutaro, the guy softy called a journeyman UT IF'er when we signed him. His contract would have prevented us from signing Ross (a guy he called a "dumpster dive"), Shoppach and Padilla, and we'd have no Mortensen now, and Scoot would be bolting as a FA.

    Cut Wake & VTek as Ben did, and we can see how much the team improved with those 2 moves he's been clamouring for 4-5 years over.

    Fire everyone.

    Looking to 2013: We'd still have CC, Beckett, Punto, and yes AGon. We'd have a Loney/Gomez platoon (since his 1st 2 choices are pipe dreams). We'd have Pods leading off, anyone but Ells in CF, and the dream of Upton in RF, since his trade proposals are not close to what AZ wants or needs.

     



    Reporter: Who is your RF?

    GM Softlaw: The idea of Justin Upton.

    Reporter: Justin Upton is not on this team.

    GM Softlaw: I didn't say Justin Upton, you feeble minded nitwit.  I said the "idea of Justin Upton."  We need to work on your comprehension.

    Reporter: I'm confused

    GM Softlaw: That's because of your weak mind.

    Seriously Moon, I would be all for this!  Softlaw for GM in 2014.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: Justin Upton on the block, expected to be moved, should the sox trigger a deal for him?

    In response to Drewski5's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    If softy was the GM, we'd never sign anyone, since his suggested offers are usually 25-30% of what FAs end up signing for.

    A review of softy's 2012 plan:

    Sign Ramon Hernandez for more than $6.4M/2 that CO payed him.

    Move Bard to starter and keep him there all year, since he was doing a "decent job" there.

    Sign scrub starters to $1M/1, like we did with A Cook. That worked well.

    Keep Scutaro, the guy softy called a journeyman UT IF'er when we signed him. His contract would have prevented us from signing Ross (a guy he called a "dumpster dive"), Shoppach and Padilla, and we'd have no Mortensen now, and Scoot would be bolting as a FA.

    Cut Wake & VTek as Ben did, and we can see how much the team improved with those 2 moves he's been clamouring for 4-5 years over.

    Fire everyone.

    Looking to 2013: We'd still have CC, Beckett, Punto, and yes AGon. We'd have a Loney/Gomez platoon (since his 1st 2 choices are pipe dreams). We'd have Pods leading off, anyone but Ells in CF, and the dream of Upton in RF, since his trade proposals are not close to what AZ wants or needs.

     



    Reporter: Who is your RF?

    GM Softlaw: The idea of Justin Upton.

    Reporter: Justin Upton is not on this team.

    GM Softlaw: I didn't say Justin Upton, you feeble minded nitwit.  I said the "idea of Justin Upton."  We need to work on your comprehension.

    Reporter: I'm confused

    GM Softlaw: That's because of your weak mind.

    Seriously Moon, I would be all for this!  Softlaw for GM in 2014.




    One things for sure..hes good at talking in circles which would be a good trait to posses with reporters.

     
  6. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Justin Upton on the block, expected to be moved, should the sox trigger a deal for him?

    In fact, Hernandez was a one year market 3 to 4M, that winter. You were pining for Varitek, for 2011.

    Your list is prevarication, and really bad.

    You cleaarly stated you wanted RamHern last winter. After he signed with the Rockies you went on and on and on about how we missed the boat. We tried to tell you he was no longer a good fielding catcher, but you clung to your position as always, no matter what happens.

    Stop your blatant lies and 'fess up.

    Now, le'ts turn to your decision to offer Tim Wakefield 2M for 2012.

    I have never denied I wanted Wake back, but if you want to keep going on and on about it, go ahead. My offer was not for a base of $2M, but with incentives, he could have reached that. Your lies about my offer are comical. Recently you said I stopped down to $750K at the end. I never went below $1M. You can't even get your lies conforming to the same thing anymore.

    I was for Bard and limited 2012 innings total, which they ignored. Cook looked great, compared to Tim Wastefield.

    Yeah, they gave Bard too many innings. That was the problem. 

    Wake could have pitched better left-handed than Bard and Cook combined. Too bad we traded Weiland too, huh? Wish we had signed Wang, or Oswalt, or Bedard, or...

    The notion that you "pay what the market says for FA" is why the Red Sox have spent nearly a billion for embarrassing big labor results for nearly a half a decade.

    Inventing another strawman, are you now?

    My offer for J. Upton, long ago, would close the deal.

    In your dreams. They don't want Ellsbury. Get over that obsession first, and maybe you can inch back to a sliver of credibility.

    In the meantime, every year you go on this pipe dreams about "a good #1 or #2". It was Santana, now it's Anderson. You are so out to lunch you keep seeking these 2nd rate pitchers, see Lackey, and then can't understand why the budget is busted and these guys coast and perform like bums on the new lawn.

    I never pined for Lackey. I was shocked when we got him for $85M, and agreed with you at the time (that alone should have made me rethink my position back then) that he was the best we could get at the time, and the injury clause helped.

    The Red Sox don't understand that the starting pitcher market is almost like clockwork when it comes to lousy 2nd rate pitchers who need the cover of the NL or west coast death valley parks. They are incompetent, failing to develop pitching and reserving big contracts for 1st rate young pitchers which are rare.

    You really believe that no quality pitcher can ever come our of NL or Left Coast. Your narrow-mindedness is silly and absurd. Brett Anderson will prove you wrong once again- just like Gio, Cody, Salty, Jacoby, and countless others.

    They don't understand value and fit in the market they are in.

    They understand a heck of a lot more than you, clown.

     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Justin Upton on the block, expected to be moved, should the sox trigger a deal for him?

    Stop the lies.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: Justin Upton on the block, expected to be moved, should the sox trigger a deal for him?

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    Stop the lies.




    apparently my advocating for Hunter on a 1 or 2 year deal at 8-10M per has now turned into "begging" for Hunter at 2 years 26M. Some here consider advocating and begging as the same thing. Not sure how they think that because the 2 are totally different.

    Obviously he couldnt provide a post where I said such a thing...Hes full of lies.

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

    Re: Justin Upton on the block, expected to be moved, should the sox trigger a deal for him?

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    Stop the lies.




    apparently my advocating for Hunter on a 1 or 2 year deal at 8-10M per has now turned into "begging" for Hunter at 2 years 26M. Some here consider advocating and begging as the same thing. Not sure how they think that because the 2 are totally different.

    Obviously he couldnt provide a post where I said such a thing...Hes full of lies.



    He often confuses one poster's position with another's, and other times he just lies for the sake of lying.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from AL34. Show AL34's posts

    Re: Justin Upton on the block, expected to be moved, should the sox trigger a deal for him?

    Every year they are trying to move this guy and he always stays put, besides someone would have to wake Young Ben up, he is interviewing hitting coaches and signing thirdvrate backup catchers.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from AL34. Show AL34's posts

    Re: Justin Upton on the block, expected to be moved, should the sox trigger a deal for him?

    Every year they are trying to move this guy and he always stays put, besides someone would have to wake Young Ben up, he is interviewing hitting coaches and signing third rate backup catchers.

     
  15. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Justin Upton on the block, expected to be moved, should the sox trigger a deal for him?

    They don't want Ellsbury for Upton. Do I have to spell out the whole argument for you to get it?

    No wait, I've already done that several times.

    Please, try to keep up or get your mom to explain things for you.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from notin. Show notin's posts

    Re: Justin Upton on the block, expected to be moved, should the sox trigger a deal for him?

    In response to Softlaw1's comment:

    someone would have to wake Young Ben up, he is interviewing hitting coaches and signing thirdvrate backup catchers.

    Post of the month! He's busy signing former coaches and backup catchers. Why not sign Wakefield and Varitek and Damon, and trade to bring Crawford back.

    It's not a lie that the DBacks would want Ellsbury's draft compensation, and paying 10M for one year of Ellsbury is also something they would value because of both the draft compensation and the contract year that will finally get Ellsbury to show up for work.

    Moonshwemp, stop your lies that the DBacks "don't want Ellsbury", when he has imbedded draft compensation on top of his contract season that the DBacks will value either to trade or retain.




    And if the ywait 2 years longer, Upton carries that same draft pick compensation.  It's not unique to Ellsbury.

     

    The DBacks do not want Ellsbury, and are not overvaluing his drat pick compensation.  It is far, far more likely they will take actual minor leaguers with some semblance of talent and a modest history of success.  you know, the thing they would hope to get with a draft pick.  I am sure they would much rther prefer they cut out the middle man and simply take the prospect(s) who have already been paid their signing bonuses.  The only way Ellsbury is remotely connected to a deal for Upton is if a thrid team is involved. 

    It is far, far more likely Ellsbury is with Boston next year, and actually also very likely Upton is still in Arizona.  Towers has been down this road with him before.   I am sure next off-season will also begin with a barrage of Upton rumors, etc.  Just like this one, and 2011 as well.  The real issue is more than Towers is not so much trying to unload Upton, but that he is trying to unload Upton for a ton.  The stories about Upton's attitude, etc. hjave all either been refuted, or are true stories that actually were about BJ Upton, who, while his brother, is also a completely different person...

     
  18. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Justin Upton on the block, expected to be moved, should the sox trigger a deal for him?

    I wouldn't think anybody would want Elles until all*star break.... and that is if they are a team in contention, need speed, need an outfielder, and believe they can make it to the show. Of course they also will want to see how Elles is performing because as of now he is a bIg question mark.

     
  20. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Justin Upton on the block, expected to be moved, should the sox trigger a deal for him?

    So, a sandwich pick swap of 2014 for 2017 is worth the difference between getting Uption and getting only "farm scraps". 

    Mind boggling silliness.

    Of course they'd rather have another prospect instead of Ellsbury's attached comp pick, one who has already shown some talent in professional baseball,  and as notin pointed out, has already been paid his signing bonus.

    It is also possible they do not even want an OF'er in return, and yet softy thinks they'll want Ells and Brentz among other lower prospects.

    AZ wants ML ready players or top prospects, not what this silly clown is dreaming about.

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

    Re: Justin Upton on the block, expected to be moved, should the sox trigger a deal for him?

    In response to Softlaw1's comment:

    They most certainly do want Ellsbury and his draft compensation and Brentz and De La Rosa or Webster and any other player on the Roster excluding Bradley and Barnes, because it's enough value to get a 3B, SS and pitcher, assuming that rumor is accurate. (In addition, include Bogearts and subtract Brentz if, unlikely, a better offer sheet comes up)

     




    There is no accurcy to the rumor.  The Diamondbacks do not want Ellsbury nor his draft pick compensation.

    So you are saying that, rather than deal Upton for layers they want, the Diamondbacks are going to trade him for players they don't want, and then trade those players away?  Got it.

     

    Say, wouldn't it be simpler to just ask the Sox for a SS and 3B, like, say Middlebrooks?  Why wouldn't the Diamondbacks simply do that instead?   It certainly seems a LOT simpler.

     

    Never mind answering that.  I am sure your answer will be just as stupid now as it has been all off-season.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: Justin Upton on the block, expected to be moved, should the sox trigger a deal for him?

    In response to notin's comment:

    In response to Softlaw1's comment:

    They most certainly do want Ellsbury and his draft compensation and Brentz and De La Rosa or Webster and any other player on the Roster excluding Bradley and Barnes, because it's enough value to get a 3B, SS and pitcher, assuming that rumor is accurate. (In addition, include Bogearts and subtract Brentz if, unlikely, a better offer sheet comes up)

     




    There is no accurcy to the rumor.  The Diamondbacks do not want Ellsbury nor his draft pick compensation.

    So you are saying that, rather than deal Upton for layers they want, the Diamondbacks are going to trade him for players they don't want, and then trade those players away?  Got it.

     

    Say, wouldn't it be simpler to just ask the Sox for a SS and 3B, like, say Middlebrooks?  Why wouldn't the Diamondbacks simply do that instead?   It certainly seems a LOT simpler.

     

    Never mind answering that.  I am sure your answer will be just as stupid now as it has been all off-season.




    desperation has clearly set in...softys comments should get really good now...

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from raider3524. Show raider3524's posts

    Re: Justin Upton on the block, expected to be moved, should the sox trigger a deal for him?

    In response to notin's comment:

    In response to Softlaw1's comment:

    They most certainly do want Ellsbury and his draft compensation and Brentz and De La Rosa or Webster and any other player on the Roster excluding Bradley and Barnes, because it's enough value to get a 3B, SS and pitcher, assuming that rumor is accurate. (In addition, include Bogearts and subtract Brentz if, unlikely, a better offer sheet comes up)

     




    There is no accurcy to the rumor.  The Diamondbacks do not want Ellsbury nor his draft pick compensation.

    So you are saying that, rather than deal Upton for layers they want, the Diamondbacks are going to trade him for players they don't want, and then trade those players away?  Got it.

     

    Say, wouldn't it be simpler to just ask the Sox for a SS and 3B, like, say Middlebrooks?  Why wouldn't the Diamondbacks simply do that instead?   It certainly seems a LOT simpler.

     

    Never mind answering that.  I am sure your answer will be just as stupid now as it has been all off-season.




    exactly...i'm not sure if he is a joke or in special ed? every post i read of his is insane.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: Justin Upton on the block, expected to be moved, should the sox trigger a deal for him?

    In response to raider3524's comment:

    In response to notin's comment:

    In response to Softlaw1's comment:

    They most certainly do want Ellsbury and his draft compensation and Brentz and De La Rosa or Webster and any other player on the Roster excluding Bradley and Barnes, because it's enough value to get a 3B, SS and pitcher, assuming that rumor is accurate. (In addition, include Bogearts and subtract Brentz if, unlikely, a better offer sheet comes up)

     




    There is no accurcy to the rumor.  The Diamondbacks do not want Ellsbury nor his draft pick compensation.

    So you are saying that, rather than deal Upton for layers they want, the Diamondbacks are going to trade him for players they don't want, and then trade those players away?  Got it.

     

    Say, wouldn't it be simpler to just ask the Sox for a SS and 3B, like, say Middlebrooks?  Why wouldn't the Diamondbacks simply do that instead?   It certainly seems a LOT simpler.

     

    Never mind answering that.  I am sure your answer will be just as stupid now as it has been all off-season.




    exactly...i'm not sure if he is a joke or in special ed? every post i read of his is insane.




    One more time so Softy understands.

    AZ GM Towers wants MLB ready SS, 3b and Pitching...Not a 1 year rental CF for 10M and more OF'ers. They could care less to get a comp pick that will not impact the team for at least 3 years if at all...They want players for 2013.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share