Yanks acquire Nady, Marte from Bucs for 4 prospects .

[schillingouttheks]

Hank Steinbrenner is one of the biggest ****s to grace baseball in quite a long time.

[a700hitter]

Marte paying dividends with a bases clearing 3 run double to Huff.

[ORS]

I just watched the replay of the call in question again, and, to me, it seems like an awful call. For one, he was not outside the baseline as ORS stated. Second, to say he showed intent is just wrong. He was running a straight line without looking back. I don't see how he could have intentionally made contact with the baseball.

 

On top of that, the play happened at the bag, meaning it didn't matter what route Cano took to get to the bag (see Game 2 1998 ALCS judgement involving Travis Fryman and Chuch Knoblauch).

Got a clip? Haven't seen it since the day of the game. By recollection, he was not in the runners lane. The rule is both feet must be in the runner's lane to be free from the umpire's judgement.

 

He doesn't need to be looking back to intentionally interfere. The throw will be coming from just in front of home plate. You can run inside the line knowing where the throw is coming from and assure your body gets in the way. Joe West saw it that way, and so did I.

[yankees228]

Got a clip? Haven't seen it since the day of the game. By recollection, he was not in the runners lane. The rule is both feet must be in the runner's lane to be free from the umpire's judgement.

 

He doesn't need to be looking back to intentionally interfere. The throw will be coming from just in front of home plate. You can run inside the line knowing where the throw is coming from and assure your body gets in the way. Joe West saw it that way, and so did I.

 

http://newyork.yankees.mlb.com/multimedia/tp_archive.jsp?c_id=nyy&ym=200510

 

Those are all the highlights from that series.

 

You may have a point...it's kind of hard to tell from the replay. My other contention was that the play took place in the vicinity of the bag meaning that it doesn't matter what route he took to the bag (IIRC).

[Gom]

I waited a day' date=' and I waited until I was sure you'd been online at Talksox. You're not planning to support your insult with explicit fact, Gom.[/quote']

Sorry, I was hitting on Dreilly, and I don't check every post every day. I do have other things to do at times.

See, Gom, the issue is that you cannot dispute what I'm writing.

Of course I am. You, and many others on this site, believe that everything goes the Yankees way. I'm with you on payroll, no disputing that disparity, but considering your team benefits second most of the thirty teams, I believe it's a very weak argument coming from a Sox fan. If you were a Twins fan, it would hold a lot more merit with me.

You're used to countering others' opinions with your bluster and bias, and on most sports forums it works. It may be rude to act that way when you're a guest at another team's site, but it's usually adequate to the level of discourse.

I didn't know you were appointed God. Last I checked, I've been here longer than you. What team I root for is irrelevant, and we are all guests here, with the exception of yeszir. You call Yankee fans elitist? Sorry, your highness.

This is different. I cite facts. You're failing to answer those facts.

 

Yes, the insinuation is extraordinary--but extraordinary does not begin to mean "impossible" in an era where NBA referees are sentenced to prison for selling their impartiality. Furthermore, trades are business decisions, not directly part of the game, and even the MLBPA has accused MLB of collusion in its business decisions. Once upon a time, in the days of Babe Ruth, it was perfectly acceptable to sell away star players if it fattened the owners' pockets. The St Louis Browns stayed profitable by doing just that. Now there are alleged protections against such sales, but there are no public audits of the books of the privately-held teams or their owners that would reveal a pattern of monetary transfers...bribes...that parallelled these repeated absurdities labeled as trades.

With you there. Wait until the end of this post. You'll see what I mean.

You cannot prove your point. I can quote journalists' and GMs' astonishment at many of the trades, and I can point out a pattern of unusually favorable results for the Yankees. The jury of the readership looks at these facts brought together, and it realizes that this last trade is not a single mistake but rather part of a pattern, and they come to understand that we cannot be getting the full story on why these trades happen.

There is no point to prove. It's unnecessary. Your "allegations" are nothing but sour grapes. It's pathetic. Most of the times, when teams make deals for prospects, the team that gives up the prospects loses the deal. It's a guarantee of today against the promise of tomorrow. It's a chance that teams take. As Branch Rickey once said to a player [Ralph Kiner, I believe] "We finished in last place with you, we can finish in last place without you". By the time the "window" the Pirates are shooting for opens, these players will not be of the value that they are now.

You respond with unsupported allegations of illogical posting.

 

Here's the truth: your posts are illogical. Your posts are unresearched. Your posts are unnecessarily rude. And here the truth behind it all: your team, their owners, and their fans are spoiled by your resources and your past successes earned on a playing field far from level.

Sorry JHB, I don't post here as a job. I question what I read, I don't necessarily take everything someone says as gospel truth. I don't follow the mantra "If it's written, it must be true." If you don't like my posts, don't respond. Try not to make this board too important in your life. As to being spoiled. Of course we are. Comes with success. So are you guys. What's the point? Is the playing field level? No. Never said it was. It sure isn't level for the 28 OTHER teams that bitch about your team. Every team that has less revenue is going to bitch about the teams that have more. Your only advantage over a Yankee fan like myself is we outspend you because we make more. The other 28 teams make the same argument as you do AGAINST YOUR TEAM. How do you justify over $200 million for three players the winter before last? You can't. Neither can I. Difference between you and I is that I acknowledge these facts, and accept them. You're in denial. I have no time, for the sake of being polite, for sub-standard level of intelligence on the issue.

Hank Steinbrenner, this month:

 

 

 

Hank Steinbrenner alleging arrogance on the part of Rays fans...is there a better example of irony?

 

But consider the moral implications of this quoted sentence: "It helps everyone when the Yankees are good." If Steinbrenner truly believes that--and one is challenged to conceive of why he would utter such arrogant words on record were he not to believe them in his soul--then he can be at this very moment excusing himself for whatever else it took besides prospects to acquire Marte and Nady. Were there any transfer of wealth unreported to MLB and the public, it was only for the good of MLB...not just the good of his franchise, the good of all of MLB.

 

At least in his own mind.

He's entitled to what he thinks. I, for the most part agree. I think that dynasties are good for sports. The major problem with the Yankees and Red Sox is that they've both gotten smart with their money, making other teams have to struggle to just sniff the playoffs. On the other hand, you the have the NFL, in which teams routinely make the SuperBowl only to not qualify for the playoffs the next year. Which is better? It simply is a question of opinion. Now, I didn't research this, as you like to point out, but I think that any sports leagues do well when the big market teams do well. Guess what? The ratings for Celtics-Lakers...ready for this....were higher than when the Spurs played the Cavs the year before. 50% HIGHER [9.3 to 6.2: here's the link]. Guess what? Ratings=money. Yankees, Red Sox, Dodgers, Cubs....the higher ups want to see them succeed because money drives these matchups...or rather, the money follows them. Do I think they cheat to get it done? No. If you want to believe in conspiracy theories, be my guest. Don't pass it off as the truth, or insult the rest of us with this drivel. Back to the Yankees doing well as good for baseball. Hank, who has more money than you or I can dream of, believes this. When a team does well, they will draw fans. However, average teams have higher attendence...wait for it...when the Yankees and Red Sox come to town, or any big market team, especially if that team is doing well. If they were sub .500 teams, the fan's won't come out as much. The games become an event, especially for average or below average teams.

The Marte-Nady trade stinks, Gom. Any objective party, knowing all of the facts, comes to that conclusion despite the absence of the Pirates' owners explaining for ESPN and SI, on the record, why they sold two of their best players in a sale thinly disguised as a trade.

I, for one, think it's a steal, not a sale. What positive would they have for doing so? Is it because George made his money as a shipbuilder, and there is another deal in the works? If that's what you believe, I blame myself for thinking you were on the intelligent side of the median. Back to the trade. Not only am I biased as a Yankee fan, but those who know me here know I always prefer veterans over prospects. Everyone thought the Gagne deal was a steal for you last year. Turned out a little bit different than expected. The Pirates, God knows why, think Ohlendorf is good. He was a deal breaker for them. I think they're idiots. My opinion on Ohlendorf's talent level. That's who they wanted. That's their talent evaluation, not mine. They took what in their opinion was the best deal. The most recent deal we had was CJ Wilson for Shawn Chacon, which was a non-move for the most part. These guys haven't had much dealing in the past to a point where they are buddies, IMO. I applaud the Yankees FO for going out and getting the players they needed when they got them. Ask yourself this, if you can be objective for a minute. If it was the Yankees who gave up the same prospects fom Sabathia, would you feel the same way? Thought so.

Live with the disgrace, Yankees fan.

This is nothing more than SOUR GRAPES. You want a steal? Take a look at Anaheim. A career OPS .762 1B for a career .909 OPS 1B. I'm sure the Yankees would have asked for a window, and I'm positive the Yankees would have given more. The Braves did what they WANTED to do, not what YOU THINK they should. If you ask me, the Red Sox should have gotten Teixeira without giving up Youk, moved Youk to LF, and traded Manny. Ideally, at least. Plus they have a good relationship with the Avenging Agent.

 

To answer the point of teams doing things outside of the rules...you might want to click on the link below. Before you make UNFOUNDED allegations about my team, take a look at this article from a two-bit newspaper here in New York called the NY Times. It's about YOUR TEAM, and how they operate outside the rules. Before you point fingers....[i'm loving this, I really am]...do some research.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/08/sports/baseball/08chass.html?_r=1&n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/People/M/Matsuzaka,%20Daisuke&oref=slogin

 

You may pull the wool over some people's eyes, those more clueless than you. Doesn't work for the rest of us. Go back to sleep.

[26 to 6]

owned!

 

Bill, you are unbelievable.

[Jayhawk Bill]

Sorry, I was hitting on Dreilly, and I don't check every post every day. I do have other things to do at times.

Of course I am. You, and many others on this site, believe that everything goes the Yankees way. I'm with you on payroll, no disputing that disparity, but considering your team benefits second most of the thirty teams, I believe it's a very weak argument coming from a Sox fan. If you were a Twins fan, it would hold a lot more merit with me.I didn't know you were appointed God. Last I checked, I've been here longer than you. What team I root for is irrelevant, and we are all guests here, with the exception of yeszir. You call Yankee fans elitist? Sorry, your highness.

 

With you there. Wait until the end of this post. You'll see what I mean.

 

There is no point to prove. It's unnecessary. Your "allegations" are nothing but sour grapes. It's pathetic. Most of the times, when teams make deals for prospects, the team that gives up the prospects loses the deal. It's a guarantee of today against the promise of tomorrow. It's a chance that teams take. As Branch Rickey once said to a player [Ralph Kiner, I believe] "We finished in last place with you, we can finish in last place without you". By the time the "window" the Pirates are shooting for opens, these players will not be of the value that they are now.

Sorry JHB, I don't post here as a job. I question what I read, I don't necessarily take everything someone says as gospel truth. I don't follow the mantra "If it's written, it must be true." If you don't like my posts, don't respond. Try not to make this board too important in your life. As to being spoiled. Of course we are. Comes with success. So are you guys. What's the point? Is the playing field level? No. Never said it was. It sure isn't level for the 28 OTHER teams that bitch about your team. Every team that has less revenue is going to bitch about the teams that have more. Your only advantage over a Yankee fan like myself is we outspend you because we make more. The other 28 teams make the same argument as you do AGAINST YOUR TEAM. How do you justify over $200 million for three players the winter before last? You can't. Neither can I. Difference between you and I is that I acknowledge these facts, and accept them. You're in denial. I have no time, for the sake of being polite, for sub-standard level of intelligence on the issue.

 

He's entitled to what he thinks. I, for the most part agree. I think that dynasties are good for sports. The major problem with the Yankees and Red Sox is that they've both gotten smart with their money, making other teams have to struggle to just sniff the playoffs. On the other hand, you the have the NFL, in which teams routinely make the SuperBowl only to not qualify for the playoffs the next year. Which is better? It simply is a question of opinion. Now, I didn't research this, as you like to point out, but I think that any sports leagues do well when the big market teams do well. Guess what? The ratings for Celtics-Lakers...ready for this....were higher than when the Spurs played the Cavs the year before. 50% HIGHER [9.3 to 6.2: here's the link]. Guess what? Ratings=money. Yankees, Red Sox, Dodgers, Cubs....the higher ups want to see them succeed because money drives these matchups...or rather, the money follows them. Do I think they cheat to get it done? No. If you want to believe in conspiracy theories, be my guest. Don't pass it off as the truth, or insult the rest of us with this drivel. Back to the Yankees doing well as good for baseball. Hank, who has more money than you or I can dream of, believes this. When a team does well, they will draw fans. However, average teams have higher attendence...wait for it...when the Yankees and Red Sox come to town, or any big market team, especially if that team is doing well. If they were sub .500 teams, the fan's won't come out as much. The games become an event, especially for average or below average teams.

 

I, for one, think it's a steal, not a sale. What positive would they have for doing so? Is it because George made his money as a shipbuilder, and there is another deal in the works? If that's what you believe, I blame myself for thinking you were on the intelligent side of the median. Back to the trade. Not only am I biased as a Yankee fan, but those who know me here know I always prefer veterans over prospects. Everyone thought the Gagne deal was a steal for you last year. Turned out a little bit different than expected. The Pirates, God knows why, think Ohlendorf is good. He was a deal breaker for them. I think they're idiots. My opinion on Ohlendorf's talent level. That's who they wanted. That's their talent evaluation, not mine. They took what in their opinion was the best deal. The most recent deal we had was CJ Wilson for Shawn Chacon, which was a non-move for the most part. These guys haven't had much dealing in the past to a point where they are buddies, IMO. I applaud the Yankees FO for going out and getting the players they needed when they got them. Ask yourself this, if you can be objective for a minute. If it was the Yankees who gave up the same prospects fom Sabathia, would you feel the same way? Thought so.

 

This is nothing more than SOUR GRAPES. You want a steal? Take a look at Anaheim. A career OPS .762 1B for a career .909 OPS 1B. I'm sure the Yankees would have asked for a window, and I'm positive the Yankees would have given more. The Braves did what they WANTED to do, not what YOU THINK they should. If you ask me, the Red Sox should have gotten Teixeira without giving up Youk, moved Youk to LF, and traded Manny. Ideally, at least. Plus they have a good relationship with the Avenging Agent.

 

To answer the point of teams doing things outside of the rules...you might want to click on the link below. Before you make UNFOUNDED allegations about my team, take a look at this article from a two-bit newspaper here in New York called the NY Times. It's about YOUR TEAM, and how they operate outside the rules. Before you point fingers....[i'm loving this, I really am]...do some research.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/08/sports/baseball/08chass.html?_r=1&n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/People/M/Matsuzaka,%20Daisuke&oref=slogin

 

You may pull the wool over some people's eyes, those more clueless than you. Doesn't work for the rest of us. Go back to sleep.

 

Preserved in its entirety for posterity.

 

Let's review what you wrote:

 

I believe it's a very weak argument...There is no point to prove... It's unnecessary. Your "allegations" are nothing but sour grapes. It's pathetic. ...As to being spoiled. Of course we are....Is the playing field level? No. Never said it was. ...Guess what? Ratings=money. Yankees....the higher ups want to see them succeed because money drives these matchups...or rather' date=' the money follows them. Do I think they cheat to get it done?...I, for one, think it's a steal, not a sale...I biased as a Yankee fan...This is nothing more than [b']SOUR GRAPES[/b].

 

Again, no proof, merely blustery and insulting allegations, oddly mixed with acknowledgement, in many ways, that I'm probably right.

 

But at the end you post:

 

To answer the point of teams doing things outside of the rules...you might want to click on the link below. Before you make UNFOUNDED allegations about my team, take a look at this article from a two-bit newspaper here in New York called the NY Times. It's about YOUR TEAM, and how they operate outside the rules. Before you point fingers....[i'm loving this, I really am]...do some research.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/08/sports/baseball/08chass.html?_r=1&n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/People/M/Matsuzaka,%20Daisuke&oref=slogin

 

Two points:

 

1) Trying to point the finger at Boston wouldn't exonerate the Yankees in any way, regardless of the veracity of the allegations; and

 

2) Read the actual words of your story:

 

One general manager said that many people at the general managers’ meeting, after hearing that Drew would sign with Boston, urged the Dodgers to file a tampering charge.

 

“We haven’t reached a decision yet,” Ned Colletti, the Dodgers’ general manager, said by telephone yesterday before leaving the winter meetings in Orlando, Fla.

 

See, there was no tampering charge determined against the Red Sox. The mouthpiece of the Yankees, Murray Chass, made an allegation, and it could easily have been investigated, but nothing was ever found to support the allegation. If one checks other articles regarding that, it all goes back to Chass, and the story then fizzles out.

 

See, Gom, there's nothing fishy at face value about an outfielder exercising an option after a good season and signing for more money at market rates. There IS something fishy about teams giving away their talent repeatedly at below market rates.

 

owned!

 

Bill, you are unbelievable.

 

Thanks! I admire your faith that my logic would come through, posting your support for me even before I demonstrated the glaring flaws in Gom's position.

[rician blast]

I'm with you on payroll' date=' no disputing that disparity, but considering your team benefits second most of the thirty teams, I believe it's a very weak argument coming from a Sox fan. If you were a Twins fan, it would hold a lot more merit with me.[/quote']

 

Actually the Sox are no longer second in payroll, at least as of opening day. The Mets and Tigers opening day payrolls exceed the Sox, and the ChiSox, Angels, Cubs, Dodgers and Mariners are all within $15m. Meanwhile, the Yankees still enjoy a $70m advantage over the #2 team, the Tigers.

 

Some things have clearly changed...others have not.

 

http://baseball.about.com/od/newsrumors/a/08teamsalaries.htm

[TheKilo]

lol @ quoting a Murray Chass article

[26 Reasons to Hate Us]

See, there was no tampering charge determined against the Red Sox. The mouthpiece of the Yankees, Murray Chass, made an allegation, and it could easily have been investigated, but nothing was ever found to support the allegation. If one checks other articles regarding that, it all goes back to Chass, and the story then fizzles out.

 

Forgive my ignorance on the subject, but just because tampering charges were never filed, and it was never investigated, doesn't mean that nothing is going on right? It just means that the Dodgers chose not to pursue it. I think Colletti's quote in the article is pretty telling in that he does not deny the allegations, but instead says that they are mulling it over. Clearly he thinks there is at least a possibility that something went on, and the allegations are not the solely the child of Murray Chass.

[ORS]

You want a steal? Take a look at Anaheim. A career OPS .762 1B for a career .909 OPS 1B.

I love that this is an element of your position because it gives us insight your analytical abilities, or lack thereof. It's not just a cut and dried, "Who's career numbers are better?" case. Therefore, I'm left with a choice of two conclusions. One, you actually do think it is only about the bottom line on the back of the baseball card. Which, if that's the case, demonstrates what a great fool you are. Two, you know there's more to it. Which, if that's the case, demonstrates how full of dung you are. Neither conclusion makes me, or anyone else here, inclined to take you seriously.

 

This is a 2-month rental. That's it. No club options. The Braves traded away 2 compensatory draft picks and 2 months of Mark Teixeira for Casey Kotchman. Kotchman is a former 1st round draft pick himself, who flew through the minor league system, made it to the bigs by the time he was 21, and has already established himself as a slightly above average MLB hitter by the age of 25. He hasn't even hit his prime yet. Will he ever be a star? Not likely, but he's a safe bet. They traded the risk of those picks busting for a guy they know can contribute for at least the next 3 years while he's under their control.

 

They did not trade away 4 compensatory draft picks and 8 months of Nady/Marte for 4 guys who look destined for an MLB bench at best. Comparing the two as similar, is, like I said, comletely stupid, or completely disingenuous. In the past, I would have leaned toward the latter as it at least credits you with some degree of thought process, but now I'm inclined to think it's the former.

[Mr Crunchy]

i dont think the sox get drew unless dice k was involved

tampering?

nobody else was going to pay that kind of money for drew so it does have logical merit even if not proven..

i also think murray chass is a cocksmoking idiot

[Gom]

Preserved in its entirety for posterity.

Again, no proof, merely blustery and insulting allegations, oddly mixed with acknowledgement, in many ways, that I'm probably right.

EXACTLY WHAT I'VE BEEN SAYING ABOUT YOUR POSTS. Thank you. Let's see your proof. Anonymous GM's are upset at the deal. Ok. Bush had more proof of WMDs than you do with your allegations.

 

You bury yourself every time you post.

See, there was no tampering charge determined against the Red Sox.

Now...we've set the precendence. Thank God. Unless there are tampering charges filed, everything is conjuncture. Good. So...let's make this easy. When you get tampering charges in the Nady/Marte deal, then talk. Other than that, keep quiet.

No. Nothing fishy about the Red Sox at all. Try READING the article. Are you done yet? Good. Now go back and READ it again.

See, Gom, there's nothing fishy at face value about an outfielder exercising an option after a good season and signing for more money at market rates. There IS something fishy about teams giving away their talent repeatedly at below market rates.,/quote]

I think the Pirates are idiots. Otherwise, they wouldn't have finished below .500 for more than a decade. If they had consistently done this with the Yankees, then I would understand where you're coming from. The only deal in recent memory was Chacon for CJ Wilson. Don't you remember that one? Wilson won MVP an Chacon won the Cy Young. Next.

However, that stuff pales to what your team has done. Nothing like getting in bed with the team that is giving up the player in a posting fee. Or the JD Drew fiasco. How about the Kevin Millar debacle? Go back and read the article.

 

Thanks! I admire your faith that my logic would come through, posting your support for me even before I demonstrated the glaring flaws in Gom's position.

Only you would think you actually come across as anything but destroyed.

 

I've proven my point here more than once. Do me a favor and let the adults talk. Go play with your crayons. I don't enjoy embarrassing you at this point.

[Gom]

I love that this is an element of your position because it gives us insight your analytical abilities, or lack thereof. It's not just a cut and dried, "Who's career numbers are better?" case. Therefore, I'm left with a choice of two conclusions. One, you actually do think it is only about the bottom line on the back of the baseball card. Which, if that's the case, demonstrates what a great fool you are. Two, you know there's more to it. Which, if that's the case, demonstrates how full of dung you are. Neither conclusion makes me, or anyone else here, inclined to take you seriously.

 

This is a 2-month rental. That's it. No club options. The Braves traded away 2 compensatory draft picks and 2 months of Mark Teixeira for Casey Kotchman. Kotchman is a former 1st round draft pick himself, who flew through the minor league system, made it to the bigs by the time he was 21, and has already established himself as a slightly above average MLB hitter by the age of 25. He hasn't even hit his prime yet. Will he ever be a star? Not likely, but he's a safe bet. They traded the risk of those picks busting for a guy they know can contribute for at least the next 3 years while he's under their control.

 

They did not trade away 4 compensatory draft picks and 8 months of Nady/Marte for 4 guys who look destined for an MLB bench at best. Comparing the two as similar, is, like I said, comletely stupid, or completely disingenuous. In the past, I would have leaned toward the latter as it at least credits you with some degree of thought process, but now I'm inclined to think it's the former.

 

Ok, ok. I know, I just had to throw that in there. Not surprised you picked it up, and JHB missed it of course. I never would have made that statement if it was you making his allegations, but then again, you wouldn't have.

 

Truthfullly, I think the Braves got hosed. I think they could have gotten more for Teixiera than Kotchmann. Part of that is sour grapes, I hope we would have gotten him, released Sexson and been on with it. Seeing him go to the Angels makes me very nervous even if we make the wild card.

 

Since you have a semblance of intelligence here, I never thought the deal with the Pirates was a fair one. I thought the Yankees got away with a huge steal. However, I think that's on the Pirates. I don't buy any allegations of unfair play. Professionals traded Fregosi for Ryan, Sykes for McGee, etc. I don't think this falls under this category either, but somewhere in the middle.

 

Do you think Teixiera was a steal? I do. Two months of a player that makes you the World Series favorite, and further strengthening your position as the team with the best record in baseball for a below average firstbaseman, albeit a young one? I'd do the trade 100% of the time if I was the Angels. Your thoughts.

[ORS]

I think the Teixiera deal made tons of sense for both sides, and both sides benefitted. In a vaccum, there's no way Kotchman gets traded for Teixiera, but the mitigating circumstances change the calculus.

 

EDIT: Do I think they could have received more in return? Not when the receiving team would only get 2 months service out of the acquisition. The reports now are that Manny will only waive his 10/5 rights if the team he goes to guarantees they won't pick up his option, making him a 2 month rental with having to deal with Boras on the free-agent market looming. Not surprisingly, the interest in him is low.

[Gom]

I think the Teixiera deal made tons of sense for both sides, and both sides benefitted. In a vaccum, there's no way Kotchman gets traded for Teixiera, but the mitigating circumstances change the calculus.

 

EDIT: Do I think they could have received more in return? Not when the receiving team would only get 2 months service out of the acquisition. The reports now are that Manny will only waive his 10/5 rights if the team he goes to guarantees they won't pick up his option, making him a 2 month rental with having to deal with Boras on the free-agent market looming. Not surprisingly, the interest in him is low.

Yeah I do. I am not high on Kotchmann. He doesn't impress me all that much. As much as I hate to say it, but I thought that the best fit was with you or the Diamondbacks. The Diamonbacks were talking about Conor Jackson, but wisely passed.

 

Playing armchair GM, I am surprised the Red Sox didn't make a move. I would have traded for Tex and I'm sure that the deal could have been done without including Youk. Here's what I would have done.

 

Trade Manny to Mets for a package headlined by Martinez.

 

Trade Martinez for Teixeira. Move Youk to left.

 

Considering your relationship with Boras, and the fact that you'd be in the thick of a pennant race, you'd have a great chance of signing Teixeira, as Boston would probably really take to him, maybe even avoiding free agency. Boras isn't what he used to be. See the Arod fiasco and the Kenny Rogers ordeal.

 

Rid yourself of the headache that is Manny and get Tex in one swoop? Ideal. I think the Braves would view Martinez as more value than Kotchmann.

 

Just my opinion.

[TheKilo]

Youkilis wasn't going to move to LF.

[Gom]

Youkilis wasn't going to move to LF.

Why not? Can't be much worse than Manny. If he didn't like it, tell him you'd trade him to the Reds. He seems like the kind of player that would do what he could to help his team win. I hate him, but admire his grittiness.

[VA Sox Fan]

I'm not going to start a new thread at this time but a friend of mine at work says the Yankees have gotten Pudge Rodriguez from the Tigers (he's listening to XM radio ESPN I think)

[Mr Crunchy]

boras lost a lot of clout in the abortion known as arod and the preceeding deal that got drew and dice k to boston...but if hes got the players they will come to him.

baseball tried collusion and failed

then they tried it again and were doing good till albert belle got 72,000,000.00 from a guy who started selling his team when they were 2.5 games out at the break.

some of these owners are worse than us and make mj look sane in comparison.

[ARod2212]

Cheez, to quote your own sig block, "Just because it's a rivalry doesn't mean you have to make retarded arguments."

 

If the issue were the Pirates, one could take their trades and find a pattern of lost value in their dealings with all teams. You haven't done that--just as you've ignored or overlooked the nine playoff spots and two World Championships earned by the Pirates in the last 45 years.

 

The pattern is that the Yankees have won a net of 12 games--roughly 120 runs of value--in their deadline trades from 2005-2007, and that this year they accomplished another trade where they completed a deal for roughly one quarter of the value of the two players received. For at least the third time in four years, other GMs are shaking their heads because the Yankees are getting a deal far better than the established market price for the players in question.

 

Address the issue with the Yankees--don't try to insult the Pirates by making s*** up and consider it a credible position.

 

 

***

 

 

Hmmm...the Yankees fans are getting blustery. I think that I've hit upon something.

 

I don't see the reason to bother going through all the trades they've made the last decade and a half to prove they have bad management. It's very easy to prove without trying.

 

Winning percentages of the Pirates since 1993

 

1993- .463

1994- .465

1995- .403

1996- .451

1997- .488

1998- .426

1999- .484

2000- .426

2001- .383

2002- .447

2003- .463

2004- .447

2005- .414

2006- .414

2007- .420

2008- .467

 

 

Do you think that maybe management has been terrible the last 15 years? The Pirates make bad moves. You don't have losing seasons 15 years in a row by accident.

 

If I were a Red Sox fan, I'd be asking why my GM didn't make an inquiry about Marte. Mets fans on WFAN have been killing Minaya since the Yankees made the trade. Minaya said that had he realized they would have come so cheap, he would have made an offer for them, but he didn't. The GMs of the other 28 teams effed up.

 

The only idiots crying conspiracy are ill informed fans. Other GMs and baseball officials are not complaining the Yankees stole Marte and Nady, they're dumbfounded at how retarded the Pirates are.

 

Nobody said the Patriots were wrong for stealing Randy Moss. The Raiders were stupid to let him go for a 4th round pick. Bad trades happen, it's not unprecidented.

[Jayhawk Bill]

Thank you. Let's see your proof.

 

Well, I started with a study of the last three years' deadline trades, I provided quotes from contemporary articles for several of those trades, and I found, upon demand, the stated market value of Nady and Marte the morning of the deal, and I pointed out that it was approximately 25% of the value provided by the Yankees.

 

See, if one looks at the pattern established in nine separate trades, one comes to realize that it's not one inexplicable act by one team, it's a pattern.

 

Now...we've set the precendence. Thank God. Unless there are tampering charges filed, everything is conjuncture. Good. So...let's make this easy. When you get tampering charges in the Nady/Marte deal, then talk. Other than that, keep quiet.

 

However, that stuff pales to what your team has done. Nothing like getting in bed with the team that is giving up the player in a posting fee. Or the JD Drew fiasco. How about the Kevin Millar debacle? Go back and read the article.

 

To the contrary. You established neither that Drew was acquired for below market value, nor that he did anything contrary to his contract. You merely cited an allegation by a single NYT sportswriter that, despite being cited elsewhere in the media, had no conceptual basis. Drew had an option. He exercised it. He got the best deal that he could: he didn't sign with Boston until over two months had passed.

 

Kevin Millar? Bedding an entire team? Pardon my failing to see how any sort of rigorous logic would include a sentence regarding Kevin Millar in a paragraph about JD Drew. If you want to claim something illegal regarding Millar, post it. If you have evidence of illegal behavior regarding NPB dealings, post it.

 

Gom, you're not supporting your points in the manner I've supported mine. Come back with a pattern of behavior in EVERY trade, deadline trade, or acquisition over a period of several years--the standard I used for my analysis--and post it. I'll consider that. Right now you're claiming that one Murray Chass article is equivalent evidence to the pages I've written, when any impartial observer would see otherwise.

 

Anonymous GM's are upset at the deal. Ok. Bush had more proof of WMDs than you do with your allegations.

 

You bury yourself every time you post.

 

Only you would think you actually come across as anything but destroyed.

 

I've proven my point here more than once. Do me a favor and let the adults talk. Go play with your crayons. I don't enjoy embarrassing you at this point.

 

I see a certain lack of respect for your words in this thread from any posters excepting Yankees fans.

 

Yeszir: Rule Four reads,

 

4) Arguments are fine and debate is encouraged, but insults will not be tolerated. Moderators will split off and lock threads that evolve into insults, and posts may be deleted. "Fights and Crap" as a sub-forum no longer exists. Keep it peaceful and cordial and if you must, make your arguments intelligently. "Flaming" will result in warnings and, if necessary, bans of a length to be determined by the moderators.

 

See, Yeszir, I'm trying to make a point, and I'm being insulted with words such as, "Do me a favor and let the adults talk. Go play with your crayons." I need to know what the rules really are. If I can respond in kind, please let me know, so that I might engage Gom at the level that he's setting without fear of banning.

[yeszir]

Right.

 

Gom: Stop with the insults. Again, arguing is fine, but the crayon and adults comment stepped over the insult line.

[Gom]

Fine, fine, didn't know you suddenly became the fun police. Why the change? I liked Talksox the way it was, where ADULTS could come here and talk as they pleased. What caused the change?

 

Since his logic has been utterly shot to shred, and I hurt his feelings, he's resorted to this. How funny can this be?

 

You know, I've had epic battles with ORS. Given and taken, and we both have a grudging respect for each other. Both have insulted, ripped apart, and demeaned each other, but as far as "online buddies" we're fine. Even pulled off one of the biggest deals in our fantasy league [thanks for Arod by the way, ORS].

 

So if you can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen.

 

Now...to answer your post...as if you haven't had enough...will someone please tell him how he is embarrassing himself?

 

So Cashman makes good trades. Does that mean that other GMs that make good trades, like Schuerholz, or Billy Beane have the league behind them, conspiring with them? Is every trade going to go 50/50? No. I give Cashman this: He's great at trades for position players especially. Always has been. I'll knock Cashman for this: He's outright terrible at free agent pitcher signings and getting pitchers in trades.

 

Is it just me, or [God, it's hard to keep from calling this guy an idiot, which, for the record, I'm not doing] are you just not seeing that your team has engaged in very shady dealing with Drew, Matsuzaka, and Millar? Did the glove have to fit on OJ? Get real.

 

Cashman also traded away Lowell for Mark Johnson, Todd Noel, and Ed Yarnall. He gave up Lilly for Jeff Weaver. He outbid the Sox for Contreras. He traded away Vazquez for RJ. So, the league was conspiring with him at the deadline...but not the rest of the year. Some GMs are better than others overall, some are better at trading, developing, etc. You haven't made a single valid point. Am I going to sit there and point out every deal? No, it really isn't that important to me. However, if someone wants to spend the time, here: Cashman trading profile. Someone figure out how good he was. Or bad. I'd guess above average, because he still has a job.

 

And yes...I put more value in what any writer puts out there than you do. You really are that arrogant? This guy does this for a living. What do you do per se? That would be like me saying I'm better at it. [if you're a banker, then, yes, I'm undoubtably better at it, cause that's what I do]. So now you're a more valuable source of information? Dude, you'd get laughed out of a job, alleging that the Yankees were doing something underhanded, while denying what any intelligent baseball observer knows about Dice K, Drew, and Millar. Once again, go read the article.

 

Here are a few others that think so about Red Sox tampering with players:

 

http://umpbump.com/press/red-sox-are-cheaters/

http://www.fanhouse.com/2007/03/06/did-the-red-sox-tamper-with-jd-drew/

http://dodgers.mlbnewsblog.com/2006/12/08/red-sox-tampering-yahoo-sports/

 

There are hundreds others. Just google it.

 

So...where is your proof that there is any funny business going on? Cashman makes good deals. Fine. Does that mean he's cheating? Of course it does! Why? He works for the Yankees! They have everyone on their payroll! Umpires, players, other teams...everyone but the Red Sox! It is really difficult being civil here.

 

Your GM cheats [of which I'm 99.99% certain] but there is no "proof", because the only one's who know are Theo and Boras, and they are not going to admit it. Wait a minute....I wonder who's done a lot of business with Boras recently....oh my God...it's Theo and the Red Sox!!! I've shown, with one article, how your team probably cheats. You have shown that Cashman is good at making trades. Wait a sec....the deal that Theo did last year for Gagne...THE RANGERS CHEATED!!!!! Why? They got the better of the deal. See? I get it know...who ever wins a trade CHEATS!!! God, why didn't I see that before?

 

On a side note, I have got the be the biggest f***ing cheater in our Fantasy League. Selig gives me inside information. I admit it.

 

Back to my "debating you". The difference is that I don't really care. See, I know my team has a competitive advantage in payroll. So if a team "bends" the rules to get who they want, I'd be a hell of a hypocrite, something you don't see about yourself, to complain. Why would you be a hypocrite? Because your team has a competitive advantage as well. You cry about it, instead of realizing how lucky you are. I don't. Life is full of haves and have nots. What pisses me off about you and every Red Sox fan who doesn't realize this is that you are a "have" who acts like a "have nots". Wake up.

 

For the record, I don't care for the new rules Yeszir. It's your board, so I guess I have to abide by it. However, I don't care if every fan, JHB included, insults me in any way shape or form, and I am free to do the same. I'm an adult here, and this is just a message board. I left [i.e. banned] from a Yankee board because I called Cashman an idiot for not trading for Santana. I like it here for the freedom to say what I wanted. Let me know, dude.

 

JHB, you can insult me anytime. You can't say anything to me that makes up for me putting you in your place in this thread. Best bet...let it go dude, you've been ripped up enough.

[26 to 6]

DAMNNN SON

[Gom]

Yeah I know, he doesn't get it. Funny though.

[ORS]

I can't believe how far you continue to epically miss the point people are making. It's bizarre. He hasn't said you won't find other references to tampering on the internet. In today's age, that would be impossible. His point, and if you follow the hyperlink trail you'll see he's right, is that all the blogs, forum posts, etc, all of it, tracks back to the Chass article. The source of all the crap you find on the internet is singular. The Chass article fizzled out quickly (and I might add, Chass has been let go by the NYT). Lots of smoke, little chance of fire.

[TheKilo]

lol

[26 Reasons to Hate Us]

Lots of smoke' date=' little chance of fire.[/quote']

 

I disagree. I think Colletti's quotes on the subject are very telling. Why wouldn't Colletti flatly deny the tampering claims (like Boras and Epstein) if he didn't think it was at least a possiblity?

 

“We haven’t reached a decision yet,”

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/08/sports/baseball/08chass.html?_r=2&n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/People/M/Matsuzaka,%20Daisuke&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

 

"We've looked into it," Colletti said, "but beyond that, I don't have anything to say at this point."

 

http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/articles/2006/12/09/door_on_gagne_is_closed

 

To me those quotes say that there is more to this than a just a sportswriter's personal vendetta.

[TheKilo]

Conjecture.