Sheffield traded to Tigers

[jacksonianmarch]

I'm blaming the teams letting the Yankees do it. I can't blame the Yanks for taking advantage of dumbass GMs.

 

The tigers offensive window is very small. Maggs, Pudge, and nobody else in that lineup. They are nto that far off and adding sheff is adding 3 yrs of credibility to the middle of the order.

[Optimist]

I can't blame the Yanks for taking advantage of dumbass GMs.

 

Exactly the point I was trying to make.

[Gom]

Holy f***. What a tool.

 

You've been wrong on numerous occassions about how things work, and you go off like this the one time you were right. Hilarious.

 

Seriously, the sleeping bit, it's just not cutting it. A genius like you has to have some material that doesn't leave people unsure whether or not they are being insulted. Try again.

 

Hmm..being right once is one more time than you have been since I've been here. When was I wrong? I've only made one prediction so far, and been right. No reason to even answer your post about fairness in payrolls at this point. Keep trying dude. Sooner or later you will get lucky. Good luck, lol.

 

By the way a700, if they pan out great. If not, they got rid of him for nothing, and even that wasn't a bad thing for them. At least they got to control where he goes. The fact another team was willing to give him an extension was their choice. The Yankees got more than pretty much everyone here thought possible. The Red Sox look to have paid through the nose to get Matsuzaka, and it has a high potential for not being worth the money.

 

If anything, the Matsuzaka signing shows that the Sox have the ability to pay like the Yankees IF THEY WANT TO. Which is what I have been saying all along. Guess you guys can't cry poverty anymore. If the rumors are true, can you imagine the heat you guys would have given us for blowing away everyone with a 38-45 million bid?

 

Your FO claim of not being able to hang with the Yankees on the Damon signing sure looks like a case of serious ********, doesn't it?

[ORS]

Hmm..being right once is one more time than you have been since I've been here. When was I wrong? I've only made one prediction so far' date=' and been right. No reason to even answer your post about fairness in payrolls at this point. Keep trying dude. Sooner or later you will get lucky. Good luck, lol.

It's interesting you use that word in red. Considering how little understanding you have shown for revenues, revenue sharing, free-agent compensation, and modern statistics it's impossible to believe your opinion about Sheff was anything more than hope. In other words, you just posted what you want to happen, and then congratulate yourself for being "right" in your non-analysis. Luck is very interesting word, and it seems to fit well here.

 

You can't answer my post about payroll fairness because you've got nothing on it, and you are good at showing it.

[riverside sluggers]

Your FO claim of not being able to hang with the Yankees on the Damon signing sure looks like a case of serious ********' date=' doesn't it?[/quote']

 

The FO didnt counter offer with Boras because he told them Damon had a 5 year offer on the table, it was more about the length of contract than it had to do with money.

[a700hitter]

By the way a700' date=' if they pan out great. If not, they got rid of him for nothing, and even that wasn't a bad thing for them. At least they got to control where he goes. The fact another team was willing to give him an extension was their choice. The Yankees got more than pretty much everyone here thought possible.[/quote']Kudos for keeping Sheffield from the Red Sox and sending him to the AL Champs that kicked their asses in the playoffs. Let's have a round of applause.

[Gom]

It's interesting you use that word in red. Considering how little understanding you have shown for revenues, revenue sharing, free-agent compensation, and modern statistics it's impossible to believe your opinion about Sheff was anything more than hope. In other words, you just posted what you want to happen, and then congratulate yourself for being "right" in your non-analysis. Luck is very interesting word, and it seems to fit well here.

 

You can't answer my post about payroll fairness because you've got nothing on it, and you are good at showing it.

 

Just to prove a point, and to let your fellow Sox fans know, I will answer your post in detail about payroll fairness tomorrow. I'm too tired to deal with it tonight. Apparently, you need your nose shoved in it, it's not good enough that your office has demonstrated exactly what I have been saying, but now I have to explain it to you since you still can't get it. Fair enough.

 

I know, I know, I understand nothing about baseball, revenues, free agent compensation, how to tie my shoes, walk and chew gum at the same time, etc., but it shows that what little you know about baseball is circumvented by your inability to realize when someone exhibits they know more about a specific subject, case, or point in general. The truth is, if you knew half as much as you think you know, you'd know ten times more than you actually do.

 

It's funny how what I called happening was right on the money, both about Sheffield and about the Red Sox fiscal ability. However, you decide to call it luck. So I'm the idiot who got lucky, and you are the baseball genius who for once got it wrong. Holy s***, would I love to have you in my fantasy league. The average guy in my league would smoke you...but that would be luck...nobody can know more about baseball than you. We should just give you the trophy right now.

 

I'll accept that my "wishful thinking" was luck if you accept that your prediction was complete and utter stupidity, mixed with a lack of understanding about how baseball economics work. In other words, fat chance, buddy. It's not that I am some baseball soothsayer, or have inside knowledge. I just use common sense, one ability you are lacking, and I am able to look at things from an objective point of view, another ability you are lacking.

 

Are you really this clueless? I'm getting to the point where I am losing IQ points debating things with you.

[Gom]

The FO didnt counter offer with Boras because he told them Damon had a 5 year offer on the table' date=' it was more about the length of contract than it had to do with money.[/quote']

 

Come on buddy...the Yankees signed him for four years. He stated they had a five year offer..it's part of negotiating, ask for more, settle for less [or the opposite from the club's point of view]. It's about the money, not the length. Most players are willing to take less if they can sign for more. The FO had the money, they just goofed.

 

Kudos for keeping Sheffield from the Red Sox and sending him to the AL Champs that kicked their asses in the playoffs. Let's have a round of applause.

 

Better than to go to the Sox where we would have to face him 19 times instead of 6 with the Tigers. Also, with the Twins, a resurgent Guardians team, and the White Sox, it's anyone's division. I'm sure that Cashman would have rather have traded him to the NL, but in the end, the best quality of players he was getting back was from Detroit. Makes no sense otherwise.

[jacksonianmarch]

Come on buddy...the Yankees signed him for four years. He stated they had a five year offer..it's part of negotiating' date=' ask for more, settle for less [or the opposite from the club's point of view']. It's about the money, not the length. Most players are willing to take less if they can sign for more. The FO had the money, they just goofed.

 

 

 

Better than to go to the Sox where we would have to face him 19 times instead of 6 with the Tigers. Also, with the Twins, a resurgent Guardians team, and the White Sox, it's anyone's division. I'm sure that Cashman would have rather have traded him to the NL, but in the end, the best quality of players he was getting back was from Detroit. Makes no sense otherwise.

 

I disagree on the top quote. Aging players these days care more about length than they do about money as long as the money is close. As a player gets past the 33-35 mark which this contract takes Damon, they want stability, not to be moved around as a nomad until they unceremoniously retire. On the other point, I find it ludicrous that Theo was "duped" by Boras's demands. He has dealt with Boras before, he knows his game, and being duped by him is a sign that he might not be that great of a GM after all.

[ORS]

Just to prove a point, and to let your fellow Sox fans know, I will answer your post in detail about payroll fairness tomorrow. I'm too tired to deal with it tonight. Apparently, you need your nose shoved in it, it's not good enough that your office has demonstrated exactly what I have been saying, but now I have to explain it to you since you still can't get it. Fair enough.

 

I know, I know, I understand nothing about baseball, revenues, free agent compensation, how to tie my shoes, walk and chew gum at the same time, etc., but it shows that what little you know about baseball is circumvented by your inability to realize when someone exhibits they know more about a specific subject, case, or point in general. The truth is, if you knew half as much as you think you know, you'd know ten times more than you actually do.

 

It's funny how what I called happening was right on the money, both about Sheffield and about the Red Sox fiscal ability. However, you decide to call it luck. So I'm the idiot who got lucky, and you are the baseball genius who for once got it wrong. Holy s***, would I love to have you in my fantasy league. The average guy in my league would smoke you...but that would be luck...nobody can know more about baseball than you. We should just give you the trophy right now.

 

I'll accept that my "wishful thinking" was luck if you accept that your prediction was complete and utter stupidity, mixed with a lack of understanding about how baseball economics work. In other words, fat chance, buddy. It's not that I am some baseball soothsayer, or have inside knowledge. I just use common sense, one ability you are lacking, and I am able to look at things from an objective point of view, another ability you are lacking.

 

Are you really this clueless? I'm getting to the point where I am losing IQ points debating things with you.

So I'm supposed to think you know about revenues when you claim the Sox and Yankees have equitable revenue streams? Only a complete an utter moron thinks this is true. Looks like you make the club.

 

You know about free-agent compensation? Right, that's why you said they wouldn't get draft picks for Sheffield had they let him go because of his off year. Wrong again. He never got classified by Elias because they picked up his option, but Gagne made it as a type-A because they consider injuries and past success, just like I said. This is exactly what would have happened with Sheff. Keep showing us what you know, just provide the necessary microscope to see it.

 

Show me where my prediction was wrong, go ahead. You can't. I didn't make one. I only said that people were overrating Sheffield's trade value. You started off thinking you'd get Lidge for him. What you got, while full of potential, is no where near the proven commodity Lidge has been. I said you'd have to pick up salary to get good value in return. They didn't have to pick up salary, but they didn't get good value either. They got good potential.

 

You are losing IQ points? Son, you need to have some first to lose them.

[Gom]

So I'm supposed to think you know about revenues when you claim the Sox and Yankees have equitable revenue streams? Only a complete an utter moron thinks this is true. Looks like you make the club.

 

You know about free-agent compensation? Right, that's why you said they wouldn't get draft picks for Sheffield had they let him go because of his off year. Wrong again. He never got classified by Elias because they picked up his option, but Gagne made it as a type-A because they consider injuries and past success, just like I said. This is exactly what would have happened with Sheff. Keep showing us what you know, just provide the necessary microscope to see it.

 

Show me where my prediction was wrong, go ahead. You can't. I didn't make one. I only said that people were overrating Sheffield's trade value. You started off thinking you'd get Lidge for him. What you got, while full of potential, is no where near the proven commodity Lidge has been. I said you'd have to pick up salary to get good value in return. They didn't have to pick up salary, but they didn't get good value either. They got good potential.

 

First of all, the Yankees would have gotten some sort of free agent compensation. However, he would have been free to sign with a direct division rival, and the Yankees got a hell of a lot more value by trading him than letting him walk.

 

You are losing IQ points? Son, you need to have some first to lose them.

 

I said they have similar revenue streams. You disagreed. If anything, your foray with Matsuzaka shows that the revenue streams are much closer than you think. Why am I even debating this with you? Just go to any web site that has the details of the Matsuzaka posting. I have stated this before, and I will state it again, the Red Sox have the ABILITY to compete with the Yankees financially. They simply choose not to. The gap, which was 70 million in payroll last year, is not a true indicator of the difference in revenue streams.

 

You also stated that the Yankees would not be able to get rid of Sheffield without eating some of his salary. I did. I said that the Yankees would find some team to take his entire salary, and get something in return. They got more than I thought they would. I would have loved to have seen Lidge, or Linebrink, but just because we want someone, doesn't mean that team will give him up. Sanchez becomes the #2 pitcher in our farm system. They've also increased their trading chips. All for nothing, really.

 

Did they get more than you thought they would, considering the Yankees didn't pay a dime to offset his salary? I would find it very hard to believe if you said no.

[jacksonianmarch]

can you two ladies take this fight into the fights thread please? It is ruining what was a good thread.

[Gom]

It's a pissing contest he can't win. I'm done with it as far as I'm concerned. The Red Sox front office proved my point. He can argue 'till he's blue in the face, but money talks.

[a700hitter]

I only said that people were overrating Sheffield's trade value. You started off thinking you'd get Lidge for him. What you got' date=' while full of potential, is no where near the proven commodity Lidge has been. I said you'd have to pick up salary to get good value in return. They didn't have to pick up salary, but they didn't get good value either. They got good potential.[/quote']ORS I remember you posting those thought, as mine were much the same. I would go a little further in my assessment. I would conclude that they got some potential, not good potential in return.

[jacksonianmarch]

Sanchez will be reporting to ST as a starter rather than a reliever as was indicated previously. He will get his shot at the bigs in the 5 slot when Pavana breaks a nail.

[jacksonianmarch]

Humberto Sanchez made his long awaited MLB debut tonight, throwing a scoreless inning, striking out 1. He was sitting mid 90s and had a nice curve tonight. Good for him.

[26 to 6]

He looked good tonight. Nice night at the beautiful ballpark in which I will probably never step foot in again. But anyway, I was real happy to see him in there tonight, throwing to Cervelli, who if you remember broke his wrist during ST when Johnny Gomes came crashing into the plate.