Official 2009-2010 Hot Stove season thread

[CoachC.]

Seems like there is no truth to the rumor.

 

[Gom]

Gom, what championship have you won?

 

ahahaha

 

1996, 1998, 1999, 2000, and 2009.

 

The way I see it...I buy 10 season tickets, I help pay for it. Even if it is no more than one clubhouse meal, so be it. I feel a connection with my team, and I am one of those that saw "we won" instead of "they won".

 

I don't harbor any illusions that I can walk into Hal's office and dictate what they should do. However, it's fun for me, I enjoy it, and it's what I like as a fanatic follower of my team.

 

Any other questions?

[ORS]

So are you also to blame for the failures of GM because your cab is a Chevy?

[Gom]

So are you also to blame for the failures of GM because your cab is a Chevy?

 

I upgraded to a 88 Ford Mercury. f*** you.

[Dipre]

Hahahhahahahahahahahahah.

 

You two are f***ing hilarious.

[example1]

Buchholz at age 24: 4.21 ERA, 92 IP, 1.38 WHIP, 6.7 K/9, 1.89 K/BB

Halladay at age 24: 3.16 ERA, 105.1 IP, 1.16 WHIP, 8.2K/9 3.84 K/BB

 

So...in EVERY f***ING CATEGORY, Halladay was better. Every one. So...is this explaination good enough for you? Significantly better in every category. Also, pitching in the height of the steroid era AGAINST the Yankees and Sox.

 

See, this is when you should concede. You ask a question that can be looked up in ten seconds on baseball reference and it makes you look like an idiot. You must be a graduate of Dipre's School of Debating Baseball. Graduated with honors, I see.

 

How many times did I use the word "thru"? I said THRU age 24. Go back and check the posts. You are so dense that you claim victory for a game nobody was playing. Thru age 24. Those are the numbers I looked at. Not the random age 24 season (which may be one players 1st season and another player's 5th depending on their team).

 

Buchholz's numbers thru age 24 were better. That was my argument. I was right.

 

Conjecture. No proof. He may or may not have pitched more this year with another team, I don't remember if he was injured or not.

 

Yet you said he was injured, so you were talking out of your ass. Again.

 

You say it is conjecture that Buchholz would have pitched more on a lesser team? Really? I think it is a very safe assumption. I assume you think that Joba would have had the Joba rules on KC and that Hughes would have been used as a setup man for BAL? Wow.

 

Here's a fangraphs take on him from July (before his relatively good appearance in 2009):

 

"In any other organization in baseball, Buchholz would be a regular member of the rotation. He’s mastered the minor leagues and even pitched fairly well in the majors, posting a career 4.34 FIP over 98 innings in 2007 and 2008. He’s got top notch stuff and improving command, which is why every GM in the world asks for him when they call Boston, but the Red Sox realize how valuable of an asset he is, which is why he’s still in their organization. Wherever he ends up, he’ll instantly become the future of the team’s rotation."

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/2009-mlb-trade-value-40-36

 

They know more than you. They've heard of Casey Kelly, for instance.

 

With the Red Sox injuries to the rotation, and trying Penny and Smoltz and totally s***ing the bed, I don't know the logic for NOT pitching Buchholz more.

 

They wanted him to improve his FB command and develop his slider further. That's the reason. They also pitch Smoltz just enough to know that he was s***ing the bed. Buchholz pitched half a season. They didn't hide him.

 

Fine. Not a prospect. It's semantics anyways. The debate is whether he'll be the All-Star you believe or the above average pitcher I see...and that may be giving him too much.

 

Yes. Let's let this stand for now. You predict average. I predict quite a bit better than average. We'll see who is right.

 

"Let's compare player A to other players. Who should we compare him to? Players of the same age with similar stats?"

 

"No way buddy...let's compare him to players who played more and did worse at the same age. Then we can get a more accurate picture of how to project him! Look...here comes the short bus to take us to school!"

 

The point is that nearly all pitchers need some time to adjust to MLB pitching. You could look at pitchers who had thrown the same cumulative # of IP, or you could look at pitchers through the same age. What doesn't make sense is to stupidly pick the "age 24 season" and compare it to that, like you did.

 

Have I? I don't know if I spoke on Scutaro on this thread or not, but assume I did. I thought the Sox should sign him, Dipre pointed out he had a career year and it would be a bad idea. I agreed with him, for once. Dropped it. However, you've been up Buchholz's ass for years now, and you've been eating crow and still to dense to realize it.

 

I've eaten a lot of crow about Buchholz, you're right. I sure feel ashamed that I prop him up as a good pitcher. Again, we will see.

 

Sadly, I have noticed. He has done a good job, the organization has. For this very reason, I would advocate trading your prospects. Their scouting and development has been good, as well as their financial coffers, so they theoretically should be able to replace the players lost in relatively short order.

 

For this very reason you advocate that Theo do what he generally hasn't done? Okay, that makes a lot of sense.

 

The reason they can't replace pitchers like Buchholz is that there aren't a lot. Not many pitchers who throw 94 with a plus-plus changeup and an excellent breaking pitch.

 

I don't know who any of these players are, nor do I care.

 

Right, why would you want to know the subject you bloviate about so often?

 

However, when you say that Buchholz has 3 widely-acknowledged plus-plus pitches, and then I look at his numbers...something doesn't jell buddy. Numbers don't lie....Dipre does, but not the numbers.

 

I think I've shown that other pitchers have had similar numbers through age 24 and have turned it around to have great careers.

 

The book isn't closed on Buchholz, even in my eyes. Not by a long shot. Ditto Joba and Hughes. However, there are still MAJOR question marks about their effectiveness. Sorry if I don't believe what your front office or my front office says about their own prospects.

 

The point is that once you trade him then the book IS closed on Buchholz--for the Red Sox. That's why the decision isn't an arbitrary one, it is one that demands a lot of thought and accurate evaluation of his talent.

 

Again, we can be through with this discussion. I think you've talked out of your ass (Buchholz doesn't throw hard)(Buchholz was injured) enough to show that you don't actually know what (or who) you're talking about.

 

We will let it play out. I think Buchholz will justify being in the Sox rotation next year and that throughout his career few will be disappointed that they chose to keep him and do something else with the $4m-per-WAR that they would have to pay in FA. You disagree. The line is drawn on this player and we will see how it plays out.

[drock]

i think we need to trade buc for roy ... i just dont trust clay he seems scared

[Dipre]

^adam123.

[drock]

I would like to see some shake up in the starting rotation . but we do need another power bat .

[CoachC.]

According to a source, the Red Sox hierarchy is split on acquiring Halladay. GM Theo Epstein, the source said, does not want to surrender the Sox's prime homegrown products - pitcher Clay Buchholz, shortstop/pitcher Casey Kelly and pitcher Daniel Bard - the Blue Jays are seeking. But Sox owner John Henry is believed to be the driving force behind completing a deal, the source said.

 

Epstein would rather use the Red Sox's abundance of lower-level prospects to pursue a deal with the Padres for slugging first baseman Adrian Gonzalez, or with the Marlins for former Red Sox farmhand Hanley Ramirez, the star shortstop. The Padres and Marlins are said to be seeking players on the cusp of the major leagues who would be under their control for several years.

 

Henry prefers to load up on star power instead of waiting for young players to bloom, like his mentor, George Steinbrenner - Henry was once a limited partner of the Yankees. The source also said that Henry has tired of losing marquee players to the Yankees in the winter acquisition scramble, going all the way back to Jose Contreras and Alex Rodriguez. Last winter, the Sox were presumed to be the front-runners for Mark Teixeira, but the Yanks swooped in to sign him to an eight-year, $180 million contract.

 

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/yankees/2009/11/29/2009-11-29_halladay_shopping_in_swing.html#ixzz0YIQ82eNZ

[example1]

That's the stupidest link I've seen in awhile. I think it is entirely reasonable that Theo and JH disagree on what to do. Theo really values prospects and from what I've read he wasn't very interested in dealing Hanley for Beckett--certainly not at the time, and most likely in retrospect.

 

Theo's job is to produce a winning team with Henry's money. If Henry says that he doesn't care about the cost/value of his wins then that might change how Theo approaches things. I just doubt that Henry has ever said that.

 

If Henry is saying "spare no expense Theo, the money doesn't matter" then we should expect to see a boatload of FAs come to the Sox this year. I won't hold my breath.

 

 

I find it interesting that all of the rumors are coming out of NY. There is very little coming out of the Herald or Globe about what's happening behind the scenes. That's the way Theo likes it.

 

I have a very hard time believing that a NY outfit would have access to the FO when the Boston guys don't. I smell ********.

[CoachC.]

 

I find it interesting that all of the rumors are coming out of NY. There is very little coming out of the Herald or Globe about what's happening behind the scenes. That's the way Theo likes it.

 

I have a very hard time believing that a NY outfit would have access to the FO when the Boston guys don't. I smell ********.

 

 

Well, it is the media capital of the world. Its really not that hard to believe the New York media has better access to the comings and goings of the Boston FO than the Boston media does when you consider that John Henry used to be a small owner in the Yankees and has had ties with The New York times. If there is a source to this info its def coming via the John Henry side of things.

[example1]

Well' date=' it is the media capital of the world. Its really not that hard to believe the New York media has better access to the comings and goings of the Boston FO than the Boston media does when you consider that John Henry used to be a small owner in the Yankees and has had ties with The New York times. If there is a source to this info its def coming via the John Henry side of things.[/quote']

 

And what exactly would be the purpose?

[Gom]

How many times did I use the word "thru"? I said THRU age 24. Go back and check the posts. You are so dense that you claim victory for a game nobody was playing. Thru age 24. Those are the numbers I looked at. Not the random age 24 season (which may be one players 1st season and another player's 5th depending on their team).

 

Buchholz's numbers thru age 24 were better. That was my argument. I was right.

Their stats are similar. If you said through that age, then fine, I misread it. I thought you said at age 24.

 

However, you're comparing a pitcher that threw nearly 150 more innings at the same age in the majors.

 

I picked the age because of one thing...it's a constant. Ichiro won ROY even though he was a much older player than the average rookie, and had been playing a level of baseball that is acknowledged to be better than AAA in Japan. I think the most fair you can be is to compare pitchers of similar ages. Why? Because players tend to decline in their mid-30s, regardless of how early they pitched or how late they developed.

Yet you said he was injured, so you were talking out of your ass. Again.

You yourself said he missed a few weeks to injury. I was quoting you...so I guess I quoted someone who was talking out of his ass which made me talk out of my ass. So the question is...who's the biggest ass? LOL!

 

Wait! Simple research shows the following:

 

Red Sox pitching coach John Farrell stated that Buchholz would most likely be in line for 180-190 innings in the 2008 season.[8] On May 15, Buchholz was placed on the 15-day disabled list as the result of a torn fingernail.[9]

Looks like he was injured there, tough guy.

You say it is conjecture that Buchholz would have pitched more on a lesser team? Really? I think it is a very safe assumption. I assume you think that Joba would have had the Joba rules on KC and that Hughes would have been used as a setup man for BAL? Wow.

 

Here's a fangraphs take on him from July (before his relatively good appearance in 2009):

 

"In any other organization in baseball, Buchholz would be a regular member of the rotation. He’s mastered the minor leagues and even pitched fairly well in the majors, posting a career 4.34 FIP over 98 innings in 2007 and 2008. He’s got top notch stuff and improving command, which is why every GM in the world asks for him when they call Boston, but the Red Sox realize how valuable of an asset he is, which is why he’s still in their organization. Wherever he ends up, he’ll instantly become the future of the team’s rotation."

Does this make sense to you?

 

Ok...I like Fangraphs. However...why didn't the Red Sox do it? First off, in 2008, he was f***ing terrible. He was optioned to Pawtucket after spring training this year. Injuries to Wakefield and Matsuzaka, and the effectiveness of Penny and Smoltz...and yet he wasn't called up to later in the season, and he was average. Not great...not terrible.

They know more than you. They've heard of Casey Kelly, for instance.

I never claimed to know more. I just claimed to not fall in love with every prospect my team touts like you do.

 

They wanted him to improve his FB command and develop his slider further. That's the reason. They also pitch Smoltz just enough to know that he was s***ing the bed. Buchholz pitched half a season. They didn't hide him.

Fair enough point.

 

Yes. Let's let this stand for now. You predict average. I predict quite a bit better than average. We'll see who is right.

I think he'll be a number 3 in the AL East, and a number 2 elsewhere. I've said that all along.

The point is that nearly all pitchers need some time to adjust to MLB pitching. You could look at pitchers who had thrown the same cumulative # of IP, or you could look at pitchers through the same age. What doesn't make sense is to stupidly pick the "age 24 season" and compare it to that, like you did.

I picked it because it's consistent. There are pitchers who pitched a ton more at a younger age, and by this point they were superstars.

 

I just think that this year is a make or break for him.

 

 

I've eaten a lot of crow about Buchholz, you're right. I sure feel ashamed that I prop him up as a good pitcher. Again, we will see.

Honestly, example1, you defend your points well. You should teach certain non-Americans to debate as well.

 

I think that you do believe the hype more than you should. I've heard all this stuff about this kid, and about Hughes, and Joba...but I haven't really seen it. Joba came out guns blazing, but been average after that. Hughes only did well after he moved to the pen, and on the big stage, he s*** the bed. Buchholz had that no-hitter, and has been average.

 

Can any of them become the dominant pitchers that the pundits claim? Maybe. I honestly don't know. However, if the opportunity comes where I can get one of the best pitchers in baseball, and put my main competition behind the 8-ball for the next few years...well...I'd do it.

 

Clay, Phil, and Joba just haven't shown me enough to not give them up for a player that would instantly make me the prohibitave World Series favorite.

 

 

For this very reason you advocate that Theo do what he generally hasn't done? Okay, that makes a lot of sense.

 

The reason they can't replace pitchers like Buchholz is that there aren't a lot. Not many pitchers who throw 94 with a plus-plus changeup and an excellent breaking pitch.

 

 

 

Right, why would you want to know the subject you bloviate about so often?

 

 

 

I think I've shown that other pitchers have had similar numbers through age 24 and have turned it around to have great careers.

 

 

 

The point is that once you trade him then the book IS closed on Buchholz--for the Red Sox. That's why the decision isn't an arbitrary one, it is one that demands a lot of thought and accurate evaluation of his talent.

 

Again, we can be through with this discussion. I think you've talked out of your ass (Buchholz doesn't throw hard)(Buchholz was injured) enough to show that you don't actually know what (or who) you're talking about.

 

We will let it play out. I think Buchholz will justify being in the Sox rotation next year and that throughout his career few will be disappointed that they chose to keep him and do something else with the $4m-per-WAR that they would have to pay in FA. You disagree. The line is drawn on this player and we will see how it plays out.

[example1]

Their stats are similar. If you said through that age, then fine, I misread it. I thought you said at age 24.

 

However, you're comparing a pitcher that threw nearly 150 more innings at the same age in the majors.

 

I picked the age because of one thing...it's a constant. Ichiro won ROY even though he was a much older player than the average rookie, and had been playing a level of baseball that is acknowledged to be better than AAA in Japan. I think the most fair you can be is to compare pitchers of similar ages. Why? Because players tend to decline in their mid-30s, regardless of how early they pitched or how late they developed.

 

Buchholz didn't start really pitching until College. His FB is still developing. I think he's a very reasonable candidate to be a late bloomer.

 

You yourself said he missed a few weeks to injury. I was quoting you...so I guess I quoted someone who was talking out of his ass which made me talk out of my ass. So the question is...who's the biggest ass? LOL!

 

Wait! Simple research shows the following:

 

Looks like he was injured there, tough guy.

 

Oh. My. God. Slapping self with palm of hand.

 

Dude. You said he was injured. I said nothing of the sort. When you said "injured" I looked it up and found 15 days on the DL for fingernail problems. You made it up, and then acknowledged that you just thought he was injured. Don't twist this into me starting stuff that isn't true. This is where I quoted you saying he was "bad and injury plagued"

 

http://www.talksox.com/forum/talk-sox-forum/13354-official-2009-2010-hot-stove-season-thread-50.html#post502503

 

Ok...I like Fangraphs. However...why didn't the Red Sox do it? First off, in 2008, he was f***ing terrible. He was optioned to Pawtucket after spring training this year. Injuries to Wakefield and Matsuzaka, and the effectiveness of Penny and Smoltz...and yet he wasn't called up to later in the season, and he was average. Not great...not terrible.

 

There were 5 starters they were more comfortable giving the ball to while Clay worked some things out. Clay got a good portion of time at AAA where he absolutely dominated, and thus eliminated any fear that his 2008 was some indication that he's not meant to be a very good MLB pitcher.

 

Fangraphs also says that Clay worked on his release point, throwing from a lower slot which improved both his GB% and his slider. He's lowered his K%, but replaced it with groundballs. Not a bad thing, in terms of getting deeper into games. He's working on throwing pitches that make outs.

 

The better question might be why let him work that out on the MLB level, lengthening his MLB time and basically wasting his cost-control? It's frustrating for Buchholz, but for the club it is much better to have him still controlled.

 

I never claimed to know more. I just claimed to not fall in love with every prospect my team touts like you do.

 

First of all, we have established I don't "fall in love with every prospect a team touts." I like players that everyone touts. Big difference.

 

Secondly, how can you critique players you have never heard of, let alone seen or read about? You make a blanket claim that all touted prospects won't be stars (which we all know) and then say that you have never heard of the particular ones that people are actually touting.

 

It's like saying that a band you've never heard of sucks, or that a movie you've never seen or heard of is probaby going to be bad. It's closed minded, by definition.

 

Can any of them become the dominant pitchers that the pundits claim? Maybe. I honestly don't know. However, if the opportunity comes where I can get one of the best pitchers in baseball, and put my main competition behind the 8-ball for the next few years...well...I'd do it.

 

I didn't ever say I wouldn't move Buchholz for Halladay. I've said that if they can sign Halladay to an extension then Clay can move. I would prefer if they kept Buchholz and moved Kellly, because Buchholz can contribute right now and is a better projectable pitcher. Losing both seems like too much to give up for a one year player who eventually makes 1/6th of the team's salary and probably signs Josh Beckett's ticket out of town.

 

Clay, Phil, and Joba just haven't shown me enough to not give them up for a player that would instantly make me the prohibitave World Series favorite.

 

Phil and Joba have been filling the MLB roster spots out of necessity. Buchholz has been working his stuff out in AAA and not accruing MLB time. Depth allowed the Sox to do this. The Yankees need Joba and Hughes to contribute last year and every year from here on out. The Red Sox have 3 SPs who are supposed to be near-#1 pitchers (Lester, Beckett and Matsuzaka). Dice struggled last year but his resume is that of a #2 at least.

 

Again, we will see what happens. Cheers.

[Gom]

Example, don't twist words around. This was all because of Halladay. As a Yankee fan, I'd trade either Joba or Hughes, plus Montero and maybe someone else for Halladay.

 

When I see Sox fans saying they won't trade Clay for Halladay, it makes me laugh. Who knows what Buchholz will be. I'm guessing, and I acknowledge that you've seen more of him, and definitely know more about him than I do.

 

What I am saying is that so far in his career, he's been average. I'd trade an average young pitcher for an older star any day of the week. Irrespective of how he does, good or bad, my position on this won't change for as long as I'm a Yankee fan.

[example1]

Example, don't twist words around. This was all because of Halladay. As a Yankee fan, I'd trade either Joba or Hughes, plus Montero and maybe someone else for Halladay.

 

When I see Sox fans saying they won't trade Clay for Halladay, it makes me laugh. Who knows what Buchholz will be. I'm guessing, and I acknowledge that you've seen more of him, and definitely know more about him than I do.

 

What I am saying is that so far in his career, he's been average. I'd trade an average young pitcher for an older star any day of the week. Irrespective of how he does, good or bad, my position on this won't change for as long as I'm a Yankee fan.

 

Why wouldn't you trade Hughes AND Joba, if they're just average young pitchers?

 

My hangup is if the Jays are starting with Buchholz and adding 3 other prospects. I think straight-up Halladay for Buchholz benefits Toronto longterm (WAR/$$-wise), so anything on top of that is gravy. I assume that's why you wouldn't trade both either.

[a700hitter]

If the Red Sox don't pull the trigger on a deal for Halladay, I wouldn't be surprised if the Yankees swooped in and got him. That would firmly establish the Yankees dominance in 2010 and maybe for a few years beyond.

[riverside sluggers]

http://www.npbtracker.com/2009/11/okajima-prioritizes-comfort-security/#content

 

Hideki Okajima wants to works out a deal with the Sox, as he is arbitration eligible through 2012

[Paradisecity]

Example, don't twist words around. This was all because of Halladay. As a Yankee fan, I'd trade either Joba or Hughes, plus Montero and maybe someone else for Halladay.

 

When I see Sox fans saying they won't trade Clay for Halladay, it makes me laugh. Who knows what Buchholz will be. I'm guessing, and I acknowledge that you've seen more of him, and definitely know more about him than I do.

 

What I am saying is that so far in his career, he's been average. I'd trade an average young pitcher for an older star any day of the week. Irrespective of how he does, good or bad, my position on this won't change for as long as I'm a Yankee fan.

 

 

 

Because you could keep Bucholz and sign Lackey for similar $$$ and have Bucholz and Lackey and prospects as opposed to Halladay?

[riverside sluggers]

Really Id rather the Sox sign Lackey, and trade Clay in a package for Adrian Gonzalez

[Dojji]

http://www.npbtracker.com/2009/11/okajima-prioritizes-comfort-security/#content

 

Hideki Okajima wants to works out a deal with the Sox, as he is arbitration eligible through 2012

 

I think it's wiser with Oki just to go year by year. He's not young, he doesn't throw hard, and although all of his years with Boston are solid, they have gotten progressively less so. That's probably just ordinary reliever variability and I'll take the worst of those 3 seasons from Oki anyday, but I'd like to wait one more year to be sure of him. If he's solid again in 2010 then he probably has at least another couple decent years after that too.

[Dipre]

Really Id rather the Sox sign Lackey' date=' and trade Clay in a package for Adrian Gonzalez[/quote']

 

That would be my dream come true.

[CoachC.]

And what exactly would be the purpose?

 

Purpose of what?

[TheMino007]

I'm not that big a fan of Lackey. His ERA has gone up each of the last three seasons and being over 30 I'm worried about his injury last season and i don't think he'll be able to throw as many innings as he used to. Pitching in the AL East, and Fenway Park would skyrocket his numbers. We would also be paying him ace money for what would essentially be a number three starter. Halladay has proven he can pitch in the AL East and guy is a workhorse.

[The_Destroyah]

I'm not that big a fan of Lackey. His ERA has gone up each of the last three seasons and being over 30 I'm worried about his injury last season and i don't think he'll be able to throw as many innings as he used to. Pitching in the AL East' date=' and Fenway Park would skyrocket his numbers. We would also be paying him ace money for what would essentially be a number three starter. Halladay has proven he can pitch in the AL East and guy is a workhorse.[/quote']

 

yes but Halladay would only be there for a year and would deplete the farm of some of its best prospects, and even if we could get an extension on Halladay, I don't know that I want him for much longer than 3 years, and he will want a bigger contract than 3 or 4 years.

[Paradisecity]

I'm not that big a fan of Lackey. His ERA has gone up each of the last three seasons and being over 30 I'm worried about his injury last season and i don't think he'll be able to throw as many innings as he used to. Pitching in the AL East' date=' and Fenway Park would skyrocket his numbers. We would also be paying him ace money for what would essentially be a number three starter. Halladay has proven he can pitch in the AL East and guy is a workhorse.[/quote']

 

Mino- I agree that Halladay is better than Lackey, but here is the question

 

is Halladay > Lackey and Bucholz?

 

(and probably a lot more)

 

because that is essentially what trading for Halladay is saying.

[Gom]

It makes no sense for the Padres to move Gonzalez at this time. He is one of their few drawing cards, and why not wait until he's a year away from free agency to trade him. Illogical.

 

As for trading Hughes AND Joba...I'm on the fence there. There is no way that Clay is worth more than Hughes AND Joba at this time. None of them have really established themselves, but Joba and Phil are younger than Clay, if I remember correctly.

[Dipre]

It makes no sense for the Padres to move Gonzalez at this time. He is one of their few drawing cards, and why not wait until he's a year away from free agency to trade him. Illogical.

 

As for trading Hughes AND Joba...I'm on the fence there. There is no way that Clay is worth more than Hughes AND Joba at this time. None of them have really established themselves, but Joba and Phil are younger than Clay, if I remember correctly.

 

So it doesn't make sense to get the maximum possible return for Gonzales when the Padres have a barren ML club and even worse minor league system?

 

Besides Kyle Blanks, there is not one impact player in that system.

[The_Destroyah]

So it doesn't make sense to get the maximum possible return for Gonzales when the Padres have a barren ML club and even worse minor league system?

 

Besides Kyle Blanks, there is not one impact player in that system.

 

DAMN YOUU DUMM DOMINCAN YOU STUPIDD LYER U KNO NOTHIIIING!!!!121!@

 

thought Id go ahead and give you Goms response