Bradley "may have to be Bogaerts

 

2 of Aceves Morales Doubront or Tazawa

vinicio or T. Lin(or if push comes to shove Cecchini)

 

What's your point?

I'm not the one denying what I said.

It looks now like Bogaerts would not have had to be part of the deal and maybe Bradley too.

I wasn't the one basically calling others idiots if they wouldn't agree to trade Bogaerts.

 

Nothing has changed, except that it looks like AZ did not get as much as either softy or I suggested as top offers to make. If the Braves called Ben and saud, "We'll give you Upton for Bogaerts", I'd still do it, but only after trying other offers first.

 

Unlike the silly clown, I don't deny my past positions.

 

BTW, are you the clown himself?

In response to moonslav59's comment:

  We'll all recognize Softpuff when he gets back.

In response to vtfanofcs' comment:

Yeah, he'll be the guy denying he's softy and saying something like, "We'll recognize..."

;)

Of cousre, the board shill's claim that "you wanted to trade Bogaerts" isn't even specious prevarication. I stated, over, and over, and over, and over, that "Bogaerts should replace Brentz only if needed to top the trade market for J. Upton, and that is unlikely".

Moonshemp, this propaganda site that you shill for is as embarrassing as your 2M contract offer to a washed up Tim Wastefield who had zero market.

This post has been removed.

In response to Softlawes' comment:

You called out posters for not agreeing to trade Bogaerts for Upton. You were clear. 

I clearly wanted Bradley instead of Bogaerts, but Jackie is your man crush prospect that you would never have agreed to trade, since he will be "Jake's" replacement and your rapture would have been complete.

 

Softlaw:

"J. Upton is, I repeat, is worth our #1 prospect."

"The market of an incompetent GM is to pay 10 million FA ticket to Ellsbury and pretend that there's more long term value and fit in hanging on to Bogaerts."

"Anyone want to defend holding back the #1 prospect for J. Upton?"

 

Now, you are here defending your position that you did not want to trade Bogaerts.

It's amazing that you can't even see your own contradictions.

Bringing up Wake is your tired old diversionary tactic that is a clear admission of defeat on the topic at hand.

In response to Softlawes' comment:

  Looks like Softpuff is back now.  Bottom line, both of you would have traded Bogaerts and more.

You called out posters for not agreeing to trade Bogaerts for Upton. You were clear. 

In fact, since I made it clear, correctly, it was highly unlikely that Bogaerts would have to be included, the only calling out was your foolish assumption that the market for J. Upton was such that you kept repeating "I think it will take Barnes or Bogearts or Bradley and I'm for trading Bradley and Bogaerts is a deal breaker". I called you out, correctly, both on the wrong assumption that J. Upton would require more than the pitiful Braves package, and on the hypothetical of making Bogaerts inclusion a deal breaker if the market was that high which I repeated, over and over, that it was likely not going to be.

I have to say, the propaganda and cesnorship on here is so pitiful that it reminds me of the federal government and social engineering, federal class identity politics and violation of the 1st amendment. This is a private site so I understand they can follow a propanda policy of viewpoint censorship, but the reality is that censoring me for responding with my many years on this site known viewpoint of both a Biblical, Natual Law and intellectual destruction of "gay" as a group identity, this was in response to that junior high mental midgets drones' personal attack "out of the closet" and "stiffy". Frankly, I couldn't have received a higher de facto endorsement of my viewpoint and tenets than the censorship from the owners of this stie.

There is nothing smaller in mind and virtue than the censorship that will surely desperately follow my words as quickly as they can get their paid police to hit the censorship "this post has been deleted" button.

I post a lot of places, and the viewpoint censorship from the Left is worse than the old USSR. The only difference is they haven't sent Eric Holder's federal identity politics police to arrest me on a bogus charge befitting Castro. 

Unlike Pike, who is truly disturbed, my purpose is unfettered comments and opinion that force drones to call their mommy to censor and "make him stop".  And the only reason I come back is because most of the readers continue to read my words. When they stop responding with anger or any interest, I will know that I have become a propagandist, too.

Cheerio;)

In response to LR3683paw's comment:

he is not using his names concurrently. he got banned earlier in the afternoon.

speaking of that. how was your day softy? did you cool down at all?

Cant wait to see Ellsbury playing CF and Wakefield helping Steven Wright master that KB.

Now that Upton has finally been traded I hope all this talk will now GO AWAY. He wasnt coming here anyways. We didnt match up well.

In response to southpaw777's comment:

He wouldn't have accepted a trade to Boston anyway. Look at the teams on his no trade list. Boston, Toronto, Chicago and Seattle. If it were a negotiating ploy wouldn't the NYY have been on there? Sounds to me like he just doesn't like the cold weather.

Softlaw:

"J. Upton is, I repeat, is worth our #1 prospect."

"The market of an incompetent GM is to pay 10 million FA ticket to Ellsbury and pretend that there's more long term value and fit in hanging on to Bogaerts."

"Anyone want to defend holding back the #1 prospect for J. Upton?"