sox to compete in 2013

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

    Re: sox to compete in 2013

    If we really "compete" in 2013, it will mean we overpaid too many FAs. There' no other way to do it, unless we totally empty the farm via trades.

    2013 is not happening, folks. Let's set our sites on 2014 and beyond. Make some trades that improve us in 2013 AND BEYOND, give some kids a chance to prove themselves, and then make some more additions next winter that will position us to seriously compete in 2014 and long afterwards.

    [/QUOTE]


    If we are not going to compete next season, why would we want to resign Papi? Why not give a young player a chance?

     

    I wont argue against this point, but looking at 2013 as a "bridge year" as I see it, and with so much budget room available, I'm leaning towards wanting to let our biggest legend retire in Boston. Besides, if we sign him for 2 years, he can help us win in 2014.

     

    If the A's and O's could compete this season with the talent they had, its rediculous to think the Sox can't compete in 2013.

     

    Yes, anything can happen. I'm not saying we have a zero chance, but I am looking at a serious chance to win a ring- not squeak into the playoffs and not even make it to the WS. My ideas for building for 2014 and beyond does improve our team for 2013 as well, and gives an outside shot to make the playoffs (like the A's and O's this year).

    Here is the team I would put on the field come September. If they play up to their abilities and past performance, to go along with just reasonable luck, they will win the division....

    Ellsbury
    Pedroia
    Middlebrooks
    Ortiz
    Napoli-Salt
    Morneau or Davis
    Hart
    Sweeney-Ross
    Bogaerts

    Lester
    Lackey
    Haren or Sanchez or Peavy
    Buchholtz
    Doubront or DeLaRosa

    Bailey
    Tazawa

    That team is better on paper then a number of teams that made the playoffs this year. You shouldn't have to give up any major prospects to get those players. The free agents should not cost crazy money. And none of the moves sacrafice the long term stability of growing the team in the future with prospects and young players in 2014.

    If we are not competing in 2013, we should not resign Papi.

    Napoli will be way overpaid- for way too many years- and is not even close to a sure bet improvement.

    How do we get Hart? (What major pieces do we give up?)

    This team listed here can compete, but I do not see it as a serious contender. Yes, anyone who makes the playoffs can win it all, but to me, it is not worth holding on to Ellsbury for some sort of all out run at a 2013 ring, when trading him would increase our chances for several years into the future starting in 2014.

     

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

    Re: sox to compete in 2013

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    Napoli will be way overpaid- for way too many years- and is not even close to a sure bet improvement.

    How do we get Hart? (What major pieces do we give up?)

    This team listed here can compete, but I do not see it as a serious contender. Yes, anyone who makes the playoffs can win it all, but to me, it is not worth holding on to Ellsbury for some sort of all out run at a 2013 ring, when trading him would increase our chances for several years into the future starting in 2014.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Why I think we should sign Napoli? I see him as the righty version of Adrian Gonzalez. He has a .878 career road OPS and a career Fenway OPS of 1.107. He would rake for us. He is not old at just 30. He would be a good combo with Salty in year 1 with Lavarnway staying in Pawtucket. Then when the team finally realizes that Salty sucks too much on defense, they can dump Salty and play Lavarnway as the backup catcher in 2014. Neither Napoli or Lavarnway have huge righty lefty splits. And you can actually use the platoon with Napoli at firstbase or DH, instead of catcher.

    I think Napoli will not cost "that much". He only had a war of about 2 this season. I think 3 years at 10-12 million probably gets it done. Is that too much?


    I just read an article wondering if Hunter Morris can replace Hart. The Brewers have a nearly 100 million dollar pay roll. Hart is making 10 million and they probably are not chomping at the bit to resign Hart next year. He probably will not be worth the qualifying offer of 13 million. He produced a War of about 2 and 3 respectively this past season. I think Hart has more WAR value or value in general playing left field for the Red Sox then he does playing first base for either team. It would be a bit of a salary dump I think aswell.

    As for cost, I see 1 year of Hart at 10 million with only a 25% chance of getting a compensation pick worth something like anyone of our AA pitchers such as Workman-Ranaudo-Britton-Hernandez-Pimental[their choice] along with maybe a D prospect thrown in. You can swallow that cost I think.

    As for 2013, I think that team could be much better then you think. Its very possible Lackey is back to pre-elbow pitching where he was a number 1 starter. Bogaerts and DelaRosa are potentially special players. This doesn't even mention the excellent depth of the bullpen and the possibility if we are competing come July of adding even more talent via trade. Things as we have seen can change real fast in baseball. And who is the scary dominant team in our division. Lot of very good teams though including potentially the Red Sox.

    And I don't see any of my moves hurting the long term in any real way. One of my strategies is to take on high paid players with 1 year left[Morneau-Hart-Haren] to help us compete this year, then replace them with better players in free agency in 2014. And possibly pick up a pick or 2 in compensation aswell. Call it a bridge year with 3-10 million+ planks in it.

     

     

     

     

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from jasko2248. Show jasko2248's posts

    Re: sox to compete in 2013

    In response to BMav's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    Napoli will be way overpaid- for way too many years- and is not even close to a sure bet improvement.

    How do we get Hart? (What major pieces do we give up?)

    This team listed here can compete, but I do not see it as a serious contender. Yes, anyone who makes the playoffs can win it all, but to me, it is not worth holding on to Ellsbury for some sort of all out run at a 2013 ring, when trading him would increase our chances for several years into the future starting in 2014.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Why I think we should sign Napoli? I see him as the righty version of Adrian Gonzalez. He has a .878 career road OPS and a career Fenway OPS of 1.107. He would rake for us. He is not old at just 30. He would be a good combo with Salty in year 1 with Lavarnway staying in Pawtucket. Then when the team finally realizes that Salty sucks too much on defense, they can dump Salty and play Lavarnway as the backup catcher in 2014. Neither Napoli or Lavarnway have huge righty lefty splits. And you can actually use the platoon with Napoli at firstbase or DH, instead of catcher.

    I think Napoli will not cost "that much". He only had a war of about 2 this season. I think 3 years at 10-12 million probably gets it done. Is that too much?


    I just read an article wondering if Hunter Morris can replace Hart. The Brewers have a nearly 100 million dollar pay roll. Hart is making 10 million and they probably are not chomping at the bit to resign Hart next year. He probably will not be worth the qualifying offer of 13 million. He produced a War of about 2 and 3 respectively this past season. I think Hart has more WAR value or value in general playing left field for the Red Sox then he does playing first base for either team. It would be a bit of a salary dump I think aswell.

    As for cost, I see 1 year of Hart at 10 million with only a 25% chance of getting a compensation pick worth something like anyone of our AA pitchers such as Workman-Ranaudo-Britton-Hernandez-Pimental[their choice] along with maybe a D prospect thrown in. You can swallow that cost I think.

    As for 2013, I think that team could be much better then you think. Its very possible Lackey is back to pre-elbow pitching where he was a number 1 starter. Bogaerts and DelaRosa are potentially special players. This doesn't even mention the excellent depth of the bullpen and the possibility if we are competing come July of adding even more talent via trade. Things as we have seen can change real fast in baseball. And who is the scary dominant team in our division. Lot of very good teams though including potentially the Red Sox.

    And I don't see any of my moves hurting the long term in any real way. One of my strategies is to take on high paid players with 1 year left[Morneau-Hart-Haren] to help us compete this year, then replace them with better players in free agency in 2014. And possibly pick up a pick or 2 in compensation aswell. Call it a bridge year with 3-10 million+ planks in it.

     

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]
    Great post...this Front Office has no intention of "bridging" to the future and it won't take a lot to be in the hunt next year.  It's going to be an interesting offseason now that the Sox have plenty of resources again...

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

    Re: sox to compete in 2013

    Buchholtz, Lester, and Doubront had ERAs of 4.56, 4.82, and 4.86 respectively. Bard is a lost cause until he proves otherwise. It illogical to expect that those three, now the leaders of our staff, will all improve significantly and remain healthy.

    So Lester, who has had 31 or more starts 5 years in a row, is unlikely to be healthy?

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

    Re: sox to compete in 2013

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    If we really "compete" in 2013, it will mean we overpaid too many FAs. There' no other way to do it, unless we totally empty the farm via trades.

    2013 is not happening, folks. Let's set our sites on 2014 and beyond. Make some trades that improve us in 2013 AND BEYOND, give some kids a chance to prove themselves, and then make some more additions next winter that will position us to seriously compete in 2014 and long afterwards.

    [/QUOTE]


    Any team can comete any season.  Baseball is a game of parity.

     

    And while anyone predicting Kansas City would not make the post-season this year probably did so with a serious degree of confidence, they probably felt equally certain about their same prediction for both Oakland and Balitmore.

     

    The Sox probably would need to sign a FA or two.  They can afford it as long as they don't get stupid.  They could also make a trade or two.

     

    The actual dumbest plan would be to wait for a year or two and assume the farm players are the answers.  How often does that work out?  So take the core we have, let it get even older, and assume Bogaerts will push the team over the top?  Even Mike Trout didn't do that.  What happens is some of the farm studs get hurt or simply don't pan out?  Rebuild?

     

    In baseball, teams do not rebuild to get better.  They rebuild to get cheaper. The Sox are not rebuilding.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Ice-Cream. Show Ice-Cream's posts

    Re: sox to compete in 2013

    In response to seannybboi's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    There shouldn't be any bridge years in Red Sox seasons. 

    [/QUOTE]


    I agree with you.  Words such as "Rebuilding" or "Bridge Year" do not exist in Red Sox Nation. 

    I expect the Red Sox to become at least a Wild Card team.  Who knows?  They might win the AL East next year.  After all, no one predicted the Oakland A's to win the AL West. 

     
  7. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: sox to compete in 2013

    In response to carnie's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to hill55's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Over the past year the Red Sox have shed Adrian Gonzalez, Jonathan Papelbon, Carl Crawford, Kevin Youkilis, Josh Beckett, Marco Scutaro, J.D. Drew, Jason Varitek, Tim Wakefield, Daisuke Matsuzaka, Mike Aviles, Josh Reddick and Jed Lowrie. David Ortiz is no lock to return.

    That's a ton of talent to replace from a team that has finished third, third and fifth in the AL East the past three seasons, culminating in this year's 93-loss club. I wish the Red Sox well, but the team faces serious challenges.

    [/QUOTE]


    Honestly I don't think the current versions of Tek, Youk, Drew, Beckett, Wakefield and Dice are that hard to replace. You could basically bring up any AAA player and probably get more out of them than those guys were going to give us going forward. Ortiz is a lock to return at this point. Aviles, Reddick and Lowrie pretty much define the term replacement level player. Losing Gonzo and Crawford hurts more but Crawford was never going to play up to his ability playing half his games at Fenway, and IMO the Sox were paying way too much for Gonzo to play a non premium defensive position. For the Sox it is all going to come down to how good (or bad) the starting pitching is. Suffice it to say I don't see the Ms finishing ahead of the Sox in 2013.

    [/QUOTE]


    He has cut and pasted that exact 2 paragraph bs on over a half-dozen different threads Carnie. just like hes done before in regards to our prospect Will Middlebrooks. Its getting a little stale...Hill needs to come up with some better material...Then I guess he can just cut and paste that too...Again...

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

    Re: sox to compete in 2013

    In response to notin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    If we really "compete" in 2013, it will mean we overpaid too many FAs. There' no other way to do it, unless we totally empty the farm via trades.

    2013 is not happening, folks. Let's set our sites on 2014 and beyond. Make some trades that improve us in 2013 AND BEYOND, give some kids a chance to prove themselves, and then make some more additions next winter that will position us to seriously compete in 2014 and long afterwards.

    [/QUOTE]


    Any team can comete any season.  Baseball is a game of parity.

     

    And while anyone predicting Kansas City would not make the post-season this year probably did so with a serious degree of confidence, they probably felt equally certain about their same prediction for both Oakland and Balitmore.

     

    The Sox probably would need to sign a FA or two.  They can afford it as long as they don't get stupid.  They could also make a trade or two.

     

    The actual dumbest plan would be to wait for a year or two and assume the farm players are the answers.  How often does that work out?  So take the core we have, let it get even older, and assume Bogaerts will push the team over the top?  Even Mike Trout didn't do that.  What happens is some of the farm studs get hurt or simply don't pan out?  Rebuild?

     

    In baseball, teams do not rebuild to get better.  They rebuild to get cheaper. The Sox are not rebuilding.

    [/QUOTE]


    exactly , I agree 100%...

    Thinking we dont have a chance unless we overpay everyone, trade the farm away, or wait for the kids in order to contend in 2013 is not realistic thinking IMO.

    A couple good moves through FA or trade, good health, a little luck from the baseball Gods and we will be involved in post season baseball in 2013.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from hill55. Show hill55's posts

    Re: sox to compete in 2013

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    He has cut and pasted that exact 2 paragraph bs on over a half-dozen different threads Carnie. just like hes done before in regards to our prospect Will Middlebrooks. Its getting a little stale...Hill needs to come up with some better material...Then I guess he can just cut and paste that too...Again...


    Our friend southpaw777 is confused:

    http://www.boston.com/community/user/5269684

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

    Re: sox to compete in 2013

    In response to hill55's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    He has cut and pasted that exact 2 paragraph bs on over a half-dozen different threads Carnie. just like hes done before in regards to our prospect Will Middlebrooks. Its getting a little stale...Hill needs to come up with some better material...Then I guess he can just cut and paste that too...Again...



    Our friend southpaw777 is confused:

     

    http://www.boston.com/community/user/5269684

    [/QUOTE]


    I apologize if this sounded like an attack the way I worded it. I have seen this same response on a few different threads though Hill. or something very similar which is why I used the term cut and paste...Im not the best with words sometimes. It sounds better in my head and sometimes not so good after it comes out.

    I know you know the game and have stated that I respect your knowledge for the game.

    I guess my point is I would like to here more from you on what the Sox could do to improve and less of why they failed. We all know the number of players that have left and it will be hard to replace. I would like to hear what you think they could do because of your knowledge of the game and the numbers.

     

     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: sox to compete in 2013

    Trot I thought all summer you insisted the Sox give Ortiz what he wants? Did you change your mind or am I wrong?

     
  15. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: sox to compete in 2013

    " There's no 2 year base market like these idiots Red Sox propagandists like Edes "report" by implication."

    I'll let you get away with that as long as you understand you are a propogandist also. 

    Here's one definition: 

    " The systematic propagation of a doctrine or cause or of information reflecting the views and interests of those advocating such a doctrine or cause."

    As in: 

    - anti-Tim "Wastefield" 

    - anti Moon

    - anti Ellsbury

    - anti Cherry

    The list of your propoganda causes goes on and on. 

    That's why you're here. 

    So it's a little odd you would find it so offensive when other people do it. 

    I've been down on the franchise and I happen to think until ownership and management changes happen at the high level (or shifts in priorities) there won't be any more championships.

    That said there is absolutely no reason the Sox can't have a competitive team next year.

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

    Re: sox to compete in 2013

    In response to TrotterNixon's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    You are wrong. I said to give him 2 years and 20 to 24m last winter, because of his younger age and 2010 production. His latest injury and current age puts an end to that. There's no 2 year base market like these idiots Red Sox propagandists like Edes "report" by implication.

    [/QUOTE]

    okay I got it..... just think had they given him the 2 last year as you argued then we would be listening to him complain this winter about how he was being disrespected by only having one year remaining.... 

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from ma6dragon9. Show ma6dragon9's posts

    Re: sox to compete in 2013

    hahahahahahaha

    Oh...you were being serious...

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    People paying attention saw Baltimore on the rise, with a manager (who was laughed at in Boston) who managed to change the whole culture of a team.

    The Yankees are the Yankees and will continue to pay, and trade to keep themselves relevent.

    TB still has one of the best staffs around.

    Oakland played in a division against LAA, who VASTLY underperformed, I'd expect a resurgence this year. SEA, who is not good. And finally, Texas, who did ok, and will probably take a slight step back.

    And using Oakland as an example of how the Sox can compete is further foolish when you cite them, and then outline a model that is NOTHING similar to how they won! They went out and got a bunch of lesser players, and kept throwing things against the wall until something worked well enough. But you want the Sox to sign 4 or 5 overpaid FAs in a weak FA pool. How's that comparable, and how's that even make baseball, financial, or rational sense?

    Napoli is the #1 guy I DO NOT WANT. People are so wrapped up in what he did in a limited sample IN Boston. How many games has he played there? 20? 30? Good sample size to go give a guy a multi year deal.

    Seriously...it's like most of you learned NOTHING over the past 4 year spiral into the basement. I guess the thinking is...if we keep digging a hole, eventually it comes out the toher side! No, it just keeps getting deeper.

    There is GOOD, YOUNG talent coming up, stop being so impatient and spoiled. "Bridge Years Don't/Shouldn't Exist in Boston"...my oh my. Entitled much?

    I:'ll happily cheer a team that is moving in the right direction, stops overpaying for people, and gives a genuine effort. Overspending on FAs doesn't breed that.

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

    Re: sox to compete in 2013

    Of course they will compete - all teams compete. How the F.O. decides to play with all this extra money will decide if they can succeed.

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

    Re: sox to compete in 2013

    Napoli will be way overpaid- for way too many years- and is not even close to a sure bet improvement.

    How do we get Hart? (What major pieces do we give up?)

    This team listed here can compete, but I do not see it as a serious contender. Yes, anyone who makes the playoffs can win it all, but to me, it is not worth holding on to Ellsbury for some sort of all out run at a 2013 ring, when trading him would increase our chances for several years into the future starting in 2014.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Why I think we should sign Napoli? I see him as the righty version of Adrian Gonzalez. He has a .878 career road OPS and a career Fenway OPS of 1.107. He would rake for us. He is not old at just 30. He would be a good combo with Salty in year 1 with Lavarnway staying in Pawtucket. Then when the team finally realizes that Salty sucks too much on defense, they can dump Salty and play Lavarnway as the backup catcher in 2014. Neither Napoli or Lavarnway have huge righty lefty splits. And you can actually use the platoon with Napoli at firstbase or DH, instead of catcher.

     

    If you think Salty is bad on defense and handling the staff, check out Mike's record. The Angels played one of the worst hitting catchers in recent memory (Mathis) over using Mike as a catcher.

    Napoli has has huge lefty-righty splits:

    2012: .861 - .706

    2011: almost identical in small sample sizes due to an injury

    2010: .966 - .700

    2009: 1.023 - .782

     

    I think Napoli will not cost "that much". He only had a war of about 2 this season. I think 3 years at 10-12 million probably gets it done. Is that too much?

    There are so many bad offensive catchers in MLB today that I think some GM will overpay dearly to get an upgrade at catcher.


    I just read an article wondering if Hunter Morris can replace Hart. The Brewers have a nearly 100 million dollar pay roll. Hart is making 10 million and they probably are not chomping at the bit to resign Hart next year. He probably will not be worth the qualifying offer of 13 million. He produced a War of about 2 and 3 respectively this past season. I think Hart has more WAR value or value in general playing left field for the Red Sox then he does playing first base for either team. It would be a bit of a salary dump I think aswell.

    As for cost, I see 1 year of Hart at 10 million with only a 25% chance of getting a compensation pick worth something like anyone of our AA pitchers such as Workman-Ranaudo-Britton-Hernandez-Pimental[their choice] along with maybe a D prospect thrown in. You can swallow that cost I think.

    I think the Brewers will want and get a heck of a lot more than B-level prospects for a guy that has raked for years.

    As for 2013, I think that team could be much better then you think. Its very possible Lackey is back to pre-elbow pitching where he was a number 1 starter. Bogaerts and DelaRosa are potentially special players. This doesn't even mention the excellent depth of the bullpen and the possibility if we are competing come July of adding even more talent via trade. Things as we have seen can change real fast in baseball. And who is the scary dominant team in our division. Lot of very good teams though including potentially the Red Sox.

    And I don't see any of my moves hurting the long term in any real way. One of my strategies is to take on high paid players with 1 year left[Morneau-Hart-Haren] to help us compete this year, then replace them with better players in free agency in 2014. And possibly pick up a pick or 2 in compensation aswell. Call it a bridge year with 3-10 million+ planks in it.

    I'm Ok with short-term bridge players that give us the appearance of competing in 2013, but it will take something more radical to be SERIOUS CONTENDERS.

     

     

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

    Re: sox to compete in 2013

    There are no bigger fans of David Ortiz, than I am. However, I am not a liar like Obama ...

    For once you are right. You are much worse than Obama in terms of being a first rate liar.

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

    Re: sox to compete in 2013

    Napoli is the #1 guy I DO NOT WANT. People are so wrapped up in what he did in a limited sample IN Boston. How many games has he played there? 20? 30? Good sample size to go give a guy a multi year deal.

    I agree that Napoli is not the answer, but he does have 73 career PAs in Boston & a 1.107 OPS and an 1.156 OPS in Yankee Stadium as well in a short sample of 24 PAs.

    Mike is a terrible fielder and staff-handler.

     
  23. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: sox to compete in 2013

    In response to TrotterNixon's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The truth hurts, even the stooges. Obama is a second rate liar. You are a first rate liar, which means your lies are more thought out than "my dog ate my homework and the Libyan Embassy".

    [/QUOTE]

    My dog "ate the Libyan Embassy"?

    That would be a lie, but I never said it. 

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from hill55. Show hill55's posts

    Re: sox to compete in 2013

    In response to BMav's comment:
    [QUOTE]If the A's and O's could compete this season with the talent they had, its rediculous to think the Sox can't compete in 2013. Here is the team I would put on the field come September. If they play up to their abilities and past performance, to go along with just reasonable luck, they will win the division....

    Ellsbury
    Pedroia
    Middlebrooks
    Ortiz
    Napoli-Salt
    Morneau or Davis
    Hart
    Sweeney-Ross
    Bogaerts

    Lester
    Lackey
    Haren or Sanchez or Peavy
    Buchholtz
    Doubront or DeLaRosa

    Bailey
    Tazawa

    That team is better on paper then a number of teams that made the playoffs this year. You shouldn't have to give up any major prospects to get those players. The free agents should not cost crazy money. And none of the moves sacrafice the long term stability of growing the team in the future with prospects and young players in 2014.

    If we are not competing in 2013, we should not resign Papi.[/QUOTE]


    Mike Napoli, David Ortiz, Anibal Sanchez, Jake Peavy and Dan Haren are among the top potential free agents and most will seek long-term contracts ... even "crazy money." Per-year cost of contracts may well rise with the significant influx of revenues under the new television deal.

    The Milwaukee Brewers, who hope to compete again in 2013, are unlikely to trade two-time All Star outfielder Corey Hart, who can block trades to 15 clubs:

    http://www.jsonline.com/sports/brewers/172900971.html

     

Share