In response to redsoxandguitars' comment:
1) Papi was now a "punch and judy hitter....with bat speed no fatser than Iggy."
In fact, Softlaw's comment was in reference to Ortiz when he first came off the DL. You prevaricate and left out where Softlaw said that Ortiz, if rested (and he was more than any season), could produce about 25 and 90 RBI's, which was about what he did. Softlaw's comment was always in reference to the merits of a 2 year contract on Ortiz, which should never have happened as Softlaw said to give Ortiz a 2 year deal with an option.
2) Papi would end up on the DL, unless he rested once a week and did not exceed 105 games.
False, Softlaw said he should be rested once a week and not go more than about 120 games. You have edited your own comments and Softlaw's comments to reflect your prevarications. Ortiz was rested more than any season, and benefited from being on the disabled list this season. He did not start and finish more than a part-time workload. Other than grand slam that resulted from the since fired incompetent Jim Leyland, Ortiz was out of gas in the playoffs.
3) Salty was a "back-up profile catcher".
Salty is a back-up profile catcher, as he sat on the bench with those hands of stone in the WS.
4) Napoli was a bum and poor fielder at 1B.
False, a patent lie. Softlaw applauded the 1 year deal after Napoli flunked the physical that ended the very stupid 30 to 40 million deal you have implored Red Sox ownership to give him. All you have done is keep aping how the Red Sox should resign a guy with degenerative hip disease who his more miles and closer to the end of his career.
5) Drew was a terrible fielder with "zero range".
False, Softlaw never said Drew was "a terrible fielder" or he has "zero range". Softlaw correctly stated that Drew had weak lateral range and was nother more than a below average fielder whose fielding percentage is nothing but a result of his weak lateral range.
I note that you, Slavemicist, said that Drew's range was weak, then pretended to be on his bandwagon and have since cowardly retreated from the stupidity of the Iglesias trade by whimpishly saying "well since Red Sox management sees Iglesias as UIF"er may as well trade him for some old castoff with plus 4 ERA and a giant contract"
6) Middy was our only hope to even make the playoffs.
False, Softlaw correctly stated the Red Sox were a bubble playoff team and that Middlebrooks was the key to contending in the playoffs. He was correct, as it was Middlebrooks double out of the grave the Red Sox lineup was in that saved the day in Game 2 of the ALCS.
7) Nava was a back-up profile LF'er.
He was and is.
8) Gomes was a waste of money.
False, a complete lie. Softlaw stated that Gomes was a fit but that the 2 year deal was a needless overpay in a market that never existed. He went on to say that the total guarantee of the deal was small enough to not be the kind of mistake you made with Santana or InEpstein and Cherry made with Crwaford, and that some GM is getting ready to make on Ellsbury, Drew and Napoli.
9) Ellsbury was, well there are too many negatives to list.
Ellsbury is the most overrated player in Red Sox history. Kemp looks like Mantle and Ted Williams next to this red-headed step child. I note that you did capitulate when I correctly stated that Ellsbury was overrated defensively in CF because he's a deer in headlights on any bloop or soft liner ball hit at or near him. The reason Ellsbury plays the big hop so many times, see Vladdy and 2009 Game 3 of ALDS, is because, despite his speed, he plays an absurdly deep CF to try and disguise what is a glaring weakness. I've seen a lot of strong defensive CF'ers, and Ellsbury falls below some of the medicore ones that I've seen. His skils are totally dependent on his speed, which will continue to decline as he moves into his thirties. His 700's OPS and OPS exposes a player of limited talent who can easily fool a lot of incompetent GM's. I expect to see some GM stupidyly guarantee this flashy phony about 100 million or more for less than the career averages and part-time work load his record reflects for his twentires work history.
I've noted that you want no part of bringing this guy back, but are too prideful and timid to refrain from the whimpy commentary about "I really want him back but I would not go more than 70 to 80M". Look, if you really want him back, let's not pretend that another 5M or so a year increase is a deal breaker!!!
Let's face it, you don't want this guy back but you're too cowardly to admit it. That's the reason why you keep shilling in this echo chamber.
10) Victorino was a huge overpay and clashed with Ellsbury.
He did, and he is a huge overpay. The false assumption is that "but for Victorino" the altneratives would not have worked on the 2013 team. Now that Shane's a virtual contract write off for the 26 million left on his contract, I want you tell me why you want Ellsbury back and would go 80 million to bring him back for what will be a big vacation as the SOP for veteran slugs who sign massive contracts. He's no exception to the rule.
11) Iggy and JBJ should be FT'ers
They should be, and will be.
12) Carp was a waste (even though he cost us no players to acquire).
Carp did little but take time away from Nava. He showed how stupid it was to sit Nava. Now that he has a tiny bench record that looks shiny with his low costs, I'm delighted, now, that he's a perfect example of selling high on a guy who will go nowhere but down, even in a bench role.
13) Wanted us to pay more than KC did for J Guthrie (arguably the leagues worst SP).
False, when Softlaw repeats that it's stupidity to ever pay more than a proven offer sheet for any player but a minor league contract profile or an obvious low cost value and fit profile, no way he would ever pay more than "KC did for Guthrie". His limit on Guthrie was one year and 5M, only if that was the market rate. So, the truth is Guthrie, one of many detailed offer budget profiles listed by Softlaw, is little more than a fabricated strawman for someone who wanted the Red Sox to trade Lester for Santana.
14) Lackey was a bum.
Lackey was and is a bum. I don't consider being a joke for most of his massive contract and then provided one season of quality labor to somehow make him a great value. But I've noted your standards are Lackey was a good contract because he had one less than a bottom half of the rotation bum. Of cousre, you wanted the Red Sox to guarantee 2 million to Wakefield in a market that never existed, becuase you loved the guy but would pretend that "I don't like the guy" but would go on to list all these stilly stat snipets to claim he was the best #5 and #6 starter in all of baseball.
15) Peavy was a bum.
Peavy is a bum.
16) Liked the Hanrahan trade.
Softlaw denounced the Hanrahan trade. Of cousre, you did little but virtually endorse it.
17) Hated the Aviles-Farrell trade.
Loved the Aviles, SS bum, being run out of town. Farrell wasn't a trade, he was a contract hire and Aviles was compensation for a manger who Softlaw said he would keep an open mind about.
18) Hated Ben as the GM.
Softlaw did hate Cherry as GM, and I'm sure still does. Hard to appluad one successful year using the yearly nuclear bomb to kill an anthill approach to each season. A lot of moves this guy has made will be bllowning up in his face, and beyond the "you get some right and you will miss a few".
19) Thought Lester was toast.
Patently a lie. Soflaw told Southfaux to extend Lester during the part of the season where he was slumping. It was you who wanted Lester traded for Santana.
20) Thought we should have kept Crawford until his value went up and hated "the Dodger trade".
Crawford should have been kept and traded when his value went up, in what wasn't a trade but what was write off. No one mentions the tons paid to Crawbust before his departure and the large sum paid to make this "trade". Beckett should have been written off separately, and AGon for Napoli goes farther than Napoli in 2013. The assumption is that Napoli was part of this magical team where only Middlebrooks and Iglesias had nothing to do with the 2013 team success. In reality, Lester, Buchholz, Lackey, Ortiz, Pedoria Koki were anywhere close to being essential performers on a team that was more lucky than good, by virtue of virtual season long injuries to Tex and Jeter, which would have changed the issue of homefield.
If this team is this "great team", it will resign Napoli, Ellsbury and Drew and prove they were more than a fluke. The 2008 Red Sox and 2007 Red Sox would destroy this Red Sox team, not to mention the 2009 Yankees et al. It was good fortune with the injury to Miggy and the blunder by Leyland when the Red Sox were buried, and even involved the Cardinals with early WS injury to Beltran and the ealier injury to Craig. It took a perfect storm of long shots to end up where it did.
Were the Red Sox due for a perfect storm of good fortune. Of course they were, after many decades of bad fortune. But, since you were starting "sell threads" before the 2013 season even started, let's not pretend that this lucky season was barely more than a fluke.
But, If that's not the case, time to guarantee about a quarter of a billion dollars to keep that magic and bring back Ellsbury, Napoli and Drew. I'd love to see it for the sake of exposing it. And because of all the whining that will take place if Ellsbury and/or Napoli and/or Drew go elsewhere and the Red Sox don't get the perfect storm miracle breaks of 2013. If we had just kep this guy or that guy, we'd be back strong in the playoffs and looking at another title. Nonsense.
(I already listed my long list of mistake
You need to list them here.
The only mistake Softlaw made, for which he gave himself an F on 2013 team ending projection, was calling them a bubble playoff team, which was true, but incorrectly calling them a non-title-contender.
There isn't anyone on this Board that even remotely suggested the 2013 Red Sox would get to the WS, much less win it, unless it was snarky joke;)
[/QUOTE]DAD & BILL-806 , CONCUR !!!! B I N G O , THAT !!!