With WEBSTER & RUBBY, Why not a "BLOCKBUSTER"........

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from mef429. Show mef429's posts

    Re: With WEBSTER & RUBBY, Why not a

    what did you have in mind??

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

    Re: With WEBSTER & RUBBY, Why not a

    Bill between you and Idiots you have once again canvassed the entire front page, pushing other good threads down and out of sight.

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

    Re: With WEBSTER & RUBBY, Why not a

    How about Webster & De La Rosa, plus a couple of throw-ins to the Dodgers for Beckett, Gonzalez and Crawford.  That might put us right back into contention.

     

     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: With WEBSTER & RUBBY, Why not a

    In response to Bill-806's comment:

     

    In response to mef429's comment:

     

    what did you have in mind??

     

    Not WEBSTER & RUBBY, thats for sure......  They are our future !!!

    On a club that needs good young pitching I will be very happy if even two out of Barnes, Rubby and Webster help our future.  I think there is a good possibility but out of the three I would keep Barnes who I think just needs more time and stamina and Rubby who has the best stuff if he can come off surgery well, if not all three of them. 

     

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

    Re: With WEBSTER & RUBBY, Why not a

    spammer

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

    Re: With WEBSTER & RUBBY, Why not a

    In response to Bill-806's comment:

    In response to mef429's comment:

     

    what did you have in mind??

     

    Not WEBSTER & RUBBY, thats for sure......  They are our future !!!


     




     

    Hey, thanks for letting us know what you didn't have in mind!!  We can all rest easy now...

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

    Re: With WEBSTER & RUBBY, Why not a

    Can't wait for "In Defense of Bill-806 IX" to hit the front page.

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

    Re: With WEBSTER & RUBBY, Why not a

    In response to mef429's comment:

     

    what did you have in mind??

     




    Hahahahahahaha

     

    As if.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from mrmojo1120. Show mrmojo1120's posts

    Re: With WEBSTER & RUBBY, Why not a

    In response to slomag's comment:

    How about Webster & De La Rosa, plus a couple of throw-ins to the Dodgers for Beckett, Gonzalez and Crawford.  That might put us right back into contention.

     



    +1

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

    Re: With WEBSTER & RUBBY, Why not a

    In response to EnchiladaT's comment:

    Can't wait for "In Defense of Bill-806 IX" to hit the front page.




    That would mean Edith would have to blow her cover wouldn't it?

     
  14. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: With WEBSTER & RUBBY, Why not a

    In response to Bill-806's comment:

    In response to EnchiladaT's comment:

     

    Bill between you and Idiots you have once again canvassed the entire front page, pushing other good threads down and out of sight.

     

    If those threads were any good, they would be in front of this one........ Ya think ??????


     




    No. Because not only do you spam the forum with you inanities, you constantly bump your own threads back to the front.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from mef429. Show mef429's posts

    Re: With WEBSTER & RUBBY, Why not a

    still haven't answered my question Bill....

     
  17. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: With WEBSTER & RUBBY, Why not a

    In response to Bill-806's comment:

    In response to carnie's comment:

     

    In response to Bill-806's comment:

     

    In response to EnchiladaT's comment:

     

    Bill between you and Idiots you have once again canvassed the entire front page, pushing other good threads down and out of sight.

     

    If those threads were any good, they would be in front of this one........ Ya think ??????


     

     




    No. Because not only do you spam the forum with you inanities, you constantly bump your own threads back to the front.

     

     

      Please,    Stop the CRYING !!!!!


     




    The truth hurts eh?

     
  19. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: With WEBSTER & RUBBY, Why not a

    Case in point.

     
  21. This post has been removed.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from MadMc44. Show MadMc44's posts

    Re: With WEBSTER & RUBBY, Why not a

    In response to Bill-806's comment:

    In response to carnie's comment:

     

    Case in point.

     

    ACEVES, JACOBY, SALTY..... Thats a good start !!!


     



    To...?

    For...?

    Thanks Bill

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

    Re: With WEBSTER & RUBBY, Why not a

    yes then lets bring a guy who started to struggle against AA pitching last year to START in centerfield in an already DEPLETED outfield....THEN lets trade away our starting catcher so we can what? start a back catcher? or a poor defensive catcher who has yet to prove his bat at the MLB level????  BRILLISNT (I just invented that word, it was a typo but I like it)

     

    Aceves fine, the bullpen is pretty deep.   Maybe you can get a high upside, far away toolsy arm for him. 

     

     

     

     

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

    Re: With WEBSTER & RUBBY, Why not a

    In response to Bill-806's comment:

     

    In response to carnie's comment:

     

    Case in point.

     

    ACEVES, JACOBY, SALTY..... Thats a good start !!!


     

     




    so you wnt to trade away 2 1yr rentals, one was injured almost all of the year and didnt perform well upon his return.The other guy (Salty), people whine about his defense, and a head case reliever?  And what exactly did you expect for a return for this motley crew?

     

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

    Re: With WEBSTER & RUBBY, Why not a

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    In response to Bill-806's comment:

     

    In response to carnie's comment:

     

    Case in point.

     

    ACEVES, JACOBY, SALTY..... Thats a good start !!!


     

     




    so you wnt to trade away 2 1yr rentals, one was injured almost all of the year and didnt perform well upon his return, the other people whine about his defense and a head case reliever?  And what exactly did you expect for a return for this motley crew?

     




    Who knew Bill was a "Hope & Change" kind of guy after all?

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share