Official 2009-2010 Hot Stove season thread

[Plumpamania]

Hey guys long time to no see....with that being said this thread is TL;DR.

 

From what I hear as being available and the "possible" Red Sox options that are being looked into is either resigning Jason Bay, bidding for Matt Holliday or possible trade opportunites or FA options such as Nick Johnson, Adrain Beltre and such.

 

Neither of those players put a "wow" factor in for me. Mark DeRosa at age 34 is probably the best free agent option available but at 34, I'm not sure of a 3 year contract at $9 million/year that is being reported he's seeking. If Mr. Johnson could just stay healthy...

 

The in house option is to get Youk to 3B and Casey Kotchman (at possibly $5 million via arbitration) at first. That option doesn't entice as much as it may have 3 years ago.

 

Another option is with the trade of Mike Lowell to Texas for Max Ramirez, is to place Martinez at 1B and Youk to 3B with Ramirez catching...

 

The popular idea is trading for Adrain Gonzalez, which of course would be amazing with what (?) 2 or 3 years of control left over before free agency...I'm sure San Diego doesn't want to give up their hometown hero so to speak and I'm sure would be demanding either/or both Clay Buccholtz and/or Casey Kelly...with Justin Masterson and Nick Hagadone gone for Victor Martinez, a supply of prospects is growing thinner.

 

With the Yankees addition of Curtis Granderson, surely helps them as a 30/20 guy over the course of the immediate future, they gave up a possible future Curtis Granderson in Austin Jackson and the dreadful Ian Kennedy, along with lefty specialist Phil Coke. Our obvious contention for next season is the Yankees and while it seems as though w/a dreadful FA class, overbidding on a guy like Matt Holliday just seems like another JD Drew experience all over again (at least this Boras' client is on the right side of 30). Holliday, like Bay before him, could have a wonderful way with the Monstah.

 

Other possible options via trade could include but not limited to Dan Uggla and switching Mr. Uggla to third base. We could look into adding on a player like Josh Willingham, who is a cheap 20 HR guy to LF.

 

Best possible option is to resign Mr. Jason Bay when he realizes no other team wants to take a waiver on him that has a shot at a winning season next year, and if he wants his best shot at a ring, being 31 and almost exiting his prime is to resign with the Red Sox. But then again if he wants to go back to a Pittsburgh situation that's his decision.

 

Cheers on a failed offseason.

[a700hitter]

I guess I don't consider Beltre to be the expensive route. I am hopeful that he will cost less than 10m and his years will be limited. I think expensive means paying more per-year than you want to' date=' and being forced to pay for longer than they want to. If Scutaro had demanded 4 seasons at 10m a year, that would have been expensive.[/quote']Beltre is a more expensive option compared to DeRosa or Johnson... no? I think that is the point the author was making. You are confusing value with expense. A Mercedes might be a better value than a Yugo, but the Yugo is less expensive. So, I'll ask again. Do you think they go the expensive route of Beltre and Holliday/Bay or the cheaper option of Cameron and Johnson/DeRosa? What are the other options that you said could be available in your earlier post? You say that you want to discuss baseball,but then you reply with "Beltre is not really expensive." The point is that he costs more than DeRosa/Johnson. Which way do you think the Sox go?

 

I believe them to. So when they make trades or don't make trades I assume it is about the future as much as it is about the present. I think they have that value and they want to stick to it.

When they make a trade, I assume nothing, because I would have no evidence to back up the assumption other than managements own statements. When they make a trade, I analyze what the trade does for the team.

There are only a limited number of players who would have represented a more significant move than swallowing Lowell's salary for a good catching prospect. That was a bold move and is the type of thing the Sox can do because of their financial advantage. They didn't land Holliday or Halladay' date=' but moving Lowell and getting Scutaro signed seem like pretty big moves to me.[/quote']When Theo made his statement about not making a big splash, Scutaro had already been signed. Does anyone think Scutaro was a big acquisition? I can't speak for Theo (although I am sure that you know what he is thinking), but he did not mention the Scutaro deal when asked about splashy deals. When Theo was asked the question, he was asked about making a major acquisition. If you want to call the Lowell trade gutsy... fine, but getting Maxamilian Ramirez is by no stretch a major acquisition. He has no chance of cracking this teams lineup and it is doubtful that he will be on the bench. Let me get this straight, Theo said that it is doubtful that the Sox would make a big acquisition, and you think Max Ramirez was the kind of acquisition he was talking about?

 

He hasn't been a big bust in Seattle. He's been worth more than his contract every season and' date=' according to WAR, he's been more valuable than Lowell. This is simply an incorrect--though common--misconception that I shared with you before I looked deeper into the numbers.[/quote']Whether or not Beltre is a bust was not the point of my post, but not surprisingly, it is the throw away line that you choose to debate. The point I was making is that I am concerned that they might opt for Kotchman at 1B/Youk at 3B instead of getting Beltre. My obvious choice here is Beltre, not Kotchman, so why are you trying so hard to prove to me how good Beltre is. Do you think they are going to sign him or make Kotchman the starter?

 

The thing I hate about Beltre' date=' more than his performance or the type of player he is, is his 2004 season. If he hadn't had that year I'd see him as a nice--albeit unspectacular--player. Instead, I'm pretty sure he used roids to get a big contract. I know, you hate that type of unfounded speculation, but if it is warranted with anyone I think it's him. His numbers that year were MVP'esque and he hasn't approached it since. THAT is what turns me off about him. Otherwise, he's a good glove, decent power, poor plate discipline guy who will give the team 3-5 WAR on a yearly basis... not horrible.[/quote']Uh... okay. So, do you think they sign him or do they go in a different direction? If you would like to discuss, I 'd be happy to ready your thoughts, but I am not interested in reading a post where you are extolling the long range plans and philosphy of the FO. This is the Hot Stove thread. I'd like to discuss moves for the upcoming season. We are all mindful of the fact that you don't put all your eggs in one basket (i.e. season) to the detriment of the long range health of the organization. We get that. Let's talk Hot Stove.

[riverside sluggers]

Sure' date=' but the kids that debut in 2010 and 2011 will likely take a little while to really round into shape, so I'd rather not count on them as impact players Until 2012. that's the price you pay, sometimes, for riding a wave of youth to contention.[/quote']

 

It all hinges on prospects then. So if the Sox traded away 4 prospects for Adrian Gonzalez or Miguel Cabrera, Sox wont have a big year until 2013/2014?

[Plumpamania]

Beltre is a more expensive option compared to DeRosa or Johnson... no? I think that is the point the author was making. You are confusing value with expense. A Mercedes might be a better value than a Yugo' date=' but the Yugo is less expensive. So, I'll ask again. Do you think they go the expensive route of Beltre and Holliday/Bay or the cheaper option of Cameron and Johnson/DeRosa? What are the other options that you said could be available in your earlier post? You say that you want to discuss baseball,but then you reply with "Beltre is not really expensive." The point is that he costs more than DeRosa/Johnson. Which way do you think the Sox go? [/quote']

 

Beltre is looking via Boras for 5 years/$14 million a year...DeRosa is looking for a min of 3 years/$9 million per year. So neither is cheap. Holliday and Bay are looking for Tex money, which neither is going to get during this Free Agency period.

 

When they make a trade, I assume nothing, because I would have no evidence to back up the assumption other than managements own statements. When they make a trade, I analyze what the trade does for the team.

When Theo made his statement about not making a big splash, Scutaro had already been signed. Does anyone think Scutaro was a big acquisition? I can't speak for Theo (although I am sure that you know what he is thinking), but he did not mention the Scutaro deal when asked about splashy deals. When Theo was asked the question, he was asked about making a major acquisition. If you want to call the Lowell trade gutsy... fine, but getting Maxamilian Ramirez is by no stretch a major acquisition. He has no chance of cracking this teams lineup and it is doubtful that he will be on the bench. Let me get this straight, Theo said that it is doubtful that the Sox would make a big acquisition, and you think Max Ramirez was the kind of acquisition he was talking about?

 

Max Ramirez was a top rated prospect in the Texas system, but much like Martinez much moreso a bat than a defensive back stop. Personally I'd have loved obtaining Taylor Teargarden but for Mike Lowell in his current condition, could we have asked for better? Agreed though no major acquisition has been made and w/o replacing Bay's production a third place finish next year is entirely possible.

 

Whether or not Beltre is a bust was not the point of my post, but not surprisingly, it is the throw away line that you choose to debate. The point I was making is that I am concerned that they might opt for Kotchman at 1B/Youk at 3B instead of getting Beltre. My obvious choice here is Beltre, not Kotchman, so why are you trying so hard to prove to me how good Beltre is. Do you think they are going to sign him or make Kotchman the starter?

 

Adrain Beltre is a wash up scrub who slugged under .400 last year. Sure he's a defensive wiz and would probably be better than Youk defenisvely at 3B but he'd hit for less than Jed Lowrie...He's on the wrong side of 30 and looking for $14 million a year according to reports at rotoworld. No thanks, I'd take Kotchman who is great defensively at 1B and a good OBP producer.

[example1]

So' date=' I'll ask again. Do you think they go the expensive route of Beltre and Holliday/Bay or the cheaper option of Cameron and Johnson/DeRosa? [/quote']

 

I have no clue what they're going to do. Ultimately I think they will go whichever route makes the most sense. Beltre at 8m/yr? Sure. Beltre at 14m/yr? No way. If the only option for Beltre is paying him too much for his services then I suspect they will go the Cameron and Johnson/DeRosa type route.

 

I'm sure you agree that decisions like this are fluid and based on how things play out, rather than set in stone, right?

 

What are the other options that you said could be available in your earlier post?

 

I wasn't talking about options that are available now. I was talking about options that would be available over the next year or so, most of which we don't know about.

 

You say that you want to discuss baseball,but then you reply with "Beltre is not really expensive." The point is that he costs more than DeRosa/Johnson. Which way do you think the Sox go?

 

Why are you so stuck on this question and why do you think I would know? Again, if Beltre costs too much they they won't pay him. If he demands a contract that is longer than they're comfortable paying, they won't sign him. It seems pretty simple...

 

When they make a trade, I assume nothing, because I would have no evidence to back up the assumption other than managements own statements. When they make a trade, I analyze what the trade does for the team.

 

Using what? WAR/$$? WARP? VORP?

 

When Theo made his statement about not making a big splash, Scutaro had already been signed. Does anyone think Scutaro was a big acquisition? I can't speak for Theo (although I am sure that you know what he is thinking), but he did not mention the Scutaro deal when asked about splashy deals. When Theo was asked the question, he was asked about making a major acquisition. If you want to call the Lowell trade gutsy... fine, but getting Maxamilian Ramirez is by no stretch a major acquisition. He has no chance of cracking this teams lineup and it is doubtful that he will be on the bench. Let me get this straight, Theo said that it is doubtful that the Sox would make a big acquisition, and you think Max Ramirez was the kind of acquisition he was talking about?

 

I don't think any of these are "major acquisitions" in terms of star-power. I think, however, that trading your starting 3B and signing a new starting SS are major acquisitions for the team. Perhaps not for the future of the ball club, but certainly for the 2010 team.

 

Whether or not Beltre is a bust was not the point of my post, but not surprisingly, it is the throw away line that you choose to debate.

 

How am I supposed to know which of your lines are throw aways and which are the nuggets of gold that you're blessing us with?

 

The point I was making is that I am concerned that they might opt for Kotchman at 1B/Youk at 3B instead of getting Beltre. My obvious choice here is Beltre, not Kotchman, so why are you trying so hard to prove to me how good Beltre is. Do you think they are going to sign him or make Kotchman the starter?

 

Again, and this is something you really need to start understanding, these options aren't set in stone. Beltre isn't sitting out there with a widely-known value. He's a FA and thus is available to multiple teams. I suspect they will go after Beltre, but with Scott Boras calling the shots for him I wouldn't be shocked if the cost becomes prohibitive.

 

If you would like to discuss, I 'd be happy to ready your thoughts, but I am not interested in reading a post where you are extolling the long range plans and philosphy of the FO.

 

Did you actually listen to the Lucchino interview I posted? I assume you didn't, since nothing you're mentioning references it.

 

 

This is the Hot Stove thread. I'd like to discuss moves for the upcoming season. We are all mindful of the fact that you don't put all your eggs in one basket (i.e. season) to the detriment of the long range health of the organization. We get that. Let's talk Hot Stove.

 

Why not talk the interview I posted in response to your clinging to the Theo "bridge" line? It's another member of the FO, afterall.

[a700hitter]

I have no clue what they're going to do. Ultimately I think they will go whichever route makes the most sense. Beltre at 8m/yr? Sure. Beltre at 14m/yr? No way. If the only option for Beltre is paying him too much for his services then I suspect they will go the Cameron and Johnson/DeRosa type route.

 

I'm sure you agree that decisions like this are fluid and based on how things play out, rather than set in stone, right?

Which way would you like to see them go, or is that fluid too? If you don't have an opinion on the issue, I'd find that more than a little funny in light of your "We're Gonna get King Felix" drum that you beat in August and September during a pennant race. That was a pretty strong opinion, so I am hoping that you have an opinion on this, or are you opinions limited to agreeing with the FO after their moves have been completed?

 

I wasn't talking about options that are available now. I was talking about options that would be available over the next year or so' date=' most of which we don't know about. [/quote']When referencing these moves, you said that they were something the author hadn't considered. The author was talking about the current state of the Sox and availability of moves for the 2010 team. He basically summarized that they would have to go 1 of 2 FA routes to fill the holes-- the expensive route (Beltre and Holliday/Bay) or inexpensive (Cameron and Johnson/DeRosa). So, I guess he didn't miss anything if you were talking about moves over the next year or so.

I don't think any of these are "major acquisitions" in terms of star-power. I think' date=' however, that trading your starting 3B and signing a new starting SS are major acquisitions for the team. Perhaps not for the future of the ball club, but certainly for the 2010 team.[/quote']Dumping our 3B was not an acquisition. Getting Max Ramirez was an acquisition, but not a major one by any standard.

How am I supposed to know which of your lines are throw aways and which are the nuggets of gold that you're blessing us with?

Since the train has left the station regarding reading comprehension, I'll give you a little clue. The "nugget(s)" about which I would like to get your thoughts almost always have a question mark at the end. Note, that there is no question mark after the prior sentence, so I am not asking for your thoughts about it.

[TheMino007]

Johnny Gomes wasn't tendered yesterday, hope thats not a guy the Sox look at to platoon with Hermida in LF, but I really hope there isn't a platoon at all

[Keeper]

Johnny Gomes wasn't tendered yesterday' date=' hope thats not a guy the Sox look at to platoon with Hermida in LF, but I really hope there isn't a platoon at all[/quote']

 

If they do intend on platooning Hermida with someone else in LF, he's not a terrible option from an offensive standpoint. He has a career line of .274/.369/.517 against LHP. But I think most fans would agree with you. Bay or Holliday is definitely preferable to a platoon situation. I would consider compromising if they got Gonzalez, though.

[a700hitter]

This doesn't sound good.

 

http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/extras/extra_bases/2009/12/frustrated_bay.html

 

I'm hoping we don't see a platoon of Hermida and Gomes. If Gomes would be platooning with Hermida, who would be available to play for Drew when he is on the rag.

[example1]

Which way would you like to see them go' date=' or is that fluid too? If you don't have an opinion on the issue, I'd find that more than a little funny in light of your "We're Gonna get King Felix" drum that you beat in August and September during a pennant race. That was a pretty strong opinion, so I am hoping that you have an opinion on this, or are you opinions limited to agreeing with the FO after their moves have been completed? [/quote']

 

I've made it clear that Beltre is my preference of the FAs to fill the 3B hole, IF they can sign him to a reasonable deal. If Boras tries to get his plalyer 14m/yr and doesn't budge then I'd rather do something else (I'll explain what below).

 

I remain committed to the idea that the Red Sox are interested in him whenever he becomes available, and I suspect he will be available sooner than a lot of other people do. Having an idea about what I think they should do in one area does not mean that I have answers about what they'll do in other areas.

 

I think the team is a little stuck around the 3B issue. The confounding issue in my mind is that Beltre's value is apparently defensive, which is very hard to measure and, thus, justify to the fans. If Beltre is hitting .265/.321/.445 but is producing wins on the defensive side, I'm not sure the FO will be able to prove that he helps to the overall contribution. It will be JD Drew all over again.

 

Given that, his contract needs to be reasonable or he will be lampooned for its duration unless they win it all. That said, if Beltre is purchased as a .766 OPS corner-infielder it could be a great signing at a time with very limited options.

 

He basically summarized that they would have to go 1 of 2 FA routes to fill the holes-- the expensive route (Beltre and Holliday/Bay) or inexpensive (Cameron and Johnson/DeRosa). So, I guess he didn't miss anything if you were talking about moves over the next year or so.

 

Yes he did. If the Red Sox have internally stopped caring if they can beat the Yankees on paper, then Josh Reddick would be an obvious option to carry the team through 1 season.

 

LF: Hermida/Ellsbury

CF: Ellsbury/Reddick

RF: Drew/Reddick

 

It isn't as good an option as getting Holliday, but it keeps them from having to be fleeced by FAs or trading partners for a LF.

 

As for 3B, I think one option would be to have a combination of Kevin Youkilis (1B/3B ), Victor Martinez (C/1B ), Max Ramirez (C/1B ) and Jason Varitek © man those positions. Ramirez is a good hitter. There's reason to think he could hold his own... again, if we're writing off beating the Yankees on paper.

 

Both of these options (Reddick and Ramirez) may not be best case scenarios, but both represent an option that doesn't force a binary choice between ruining the future with overpriced FAs or ruining the future with an enormously expensive trade. The article--and you--argued that there's only two options, I think there's quite a few more.

 

I will ask again, in the interest of this discussion, did you listen to the Lucchino interview?

[example1]

This doesn't sound good.

 

http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/extras/extra_bases/2009/12/frustrated_bay.html

 

I'm hoping we don't see a platoon of Hermida and Gomes. If Gomes would be platooning with Hermida, who would be available to play for Drew when he is on the rag.

 

I hope we don't see a platoon of Hermida and Gomes as well.

 

The hard part is that we know this is going to come down to Holliday and Boras. I think the entire time they've wanted to get Holliday over Bay, which is a very risky move if they don't get either. That doesn't mean they should go after Holliday without sparing any expense, but they shouldn't spare much. They will be in much better shape longterm if they have Holliday on their roster.

[a700hitter]

I hope we don't see a platoon of Hermida and Gomes as well.

 

The hard part is that we know this is going to come down to Holliday and Boras. I think the entire time they've wanted to get Holliday over Bay, which is a very risky move if they don't get either. That doesn't mean they should go after Holliday without sparing any expense, but they shouldn't spare much. They will be in much better shape longterm if they have Holliday on their roster.

I agree.

[riverside sluggers]

If they do intend on platooning Hermida with someone else in LF' date=' he's not a terrible option from an offensive standpoint. He has a career line of .274/.369/.517 against LHP. But I think most fans would agree with you. Bay or Holliday is definitely preferable to a platoon situation. I would consider compromising if they got Gonzalez, though.[/quote']

 

I also heard on weei that if the Sox fail to look for a starting corner infielder.. they could look for a platoon mate for Casey Kotchman

 

I just cant imagine that a big franchise like Boston would have platoons at 2 important positions, 1st base and left field

 

-------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/articles/2009/12/13/tough_players_leave_yankees_with_a_tough_call/?page=3

 

The Padres are asking for Clay Buchholz and Casey Kelly or Ryan Westmoreland.. but Theo isnt budging. Adrian Gonzalez has told the Padres that his preferred destination is Boston! Grr, get the deal done

[a700hitter]

I also heard on weei that if the Sox fail to look for a starting corner infielder.. they could look for a platoon mate for Casey Kotchman

This is what I feared the minute they traded Lowell. Everyone knows how I feel about Kotchman. There are so many options at 1B that are better than him. Let's face the fact, he is a bottom of the order hitter, with little or no power and Fenway will kill what little power he has. He's the slowest non-catcher on the team now that Lowell is gone. I can't see how they want a slap hitting lead foot in the lineup at any postion, nevermind first base where there are lots of power options. I guess he would platoon with VMart at 1B when he needs a rest from catching. The trickle down effect of a platoon with VMart is that we will probably see Tek behind the plate for about 60-80 games. This type of platoon rotation will weaken the team offensively from where it was at the end of 2009.

[a700hitter]

The Padres are asking for Clay Buchholz and Casey Kelly or Ryan Westmoreland.. but Theo isnt budging. Adrian Gonzalez has told the Padres that his preferred destination is Boston! Grr' date=' get the deal done[/quote']If this is what it takes, they should get it done. Gonzalez is an elite hitter, and he's young. You've go to grab a guy like this if he is available. If it costs them Buchholz, they could sign Lackey, and then they have built a nice bridge to 2012.

[TheKilo]

Sharing the opinions of the authors warrants a personal attack? Really? I was hoping for a discussion of the article. Discussion of issues is why I come here. I don't come here for hit and run insults. Is that why you are here? BTW' date=' what substantive issue are you trying to discuss with me? So, you are defending insult and run or troll and run posts?[/quote']

 

You called him a free-loader. Sounds like a personal attack to me.

 

Do you believe what Shaughnessy and Silverman wrote? If so, why? What evidence do you have to feel that way?

[TheKilo]

Did the author of this article make either of those points? Here's the link again:

 

http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/b..._only_way_out/

 

I think he was making the point that after an uneventful Winter Meetings, the FO will have to resort to Free Agency to fill the holes unless they are considering a blockbuster trade for Sox prospects. He pointed out that there are the expensive free agent options, i.e., Beltre and Bay/Holliday, or the bargain basement free agent options, i.e, Mike Cameron and DeRosa/Nick Johnson. Do you disagree that is where the Sox are at this juncture?

 

As for the two questions you have asked that are not even implied in the article, the answers are no and no.

 

I have a similar type of question for you. Do you think the FO is infallible and never makes a mistake?

 

I'm pretty sure no one has ever made that claim but nice strawman regardless.

[CoachC.]

For the moment, discussions between the Red Sox and Padres concerning first baseman Adrian Gonzalez are going nowhere, according to a major league source. And it’s for the obvious reason - compensation. Padres GM Jed Hoyer, certainly familiar with Boston’s inventory, is asking for Clay Buchholz and righthanded pitching prospect Casey Kelly or outfielder Ryan Westmoreland.

 

The Red Sox, at least for the time being, won’t include Kelly or Westmoreland. With former Sox scouting director Jason McLeod now assisting Hoyer, the emphasis will be even more on trying to get Boston’s best prospects.

 

One teammate indicated Gonzalez has made Boston his preferred destination if he should be dealt.

 

http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/articles/2009/12/13/tough_players_leave_yankees_with_a_tough_call/?page=full

[example1]

http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/articles/2009/12/13/tough_players_leave_yankees_with_a_tough_call/?page=full

 

I think it would be a lot to give up Buchholz and Kelly or Westoreland. This would be creating a hole to fill a hole, which I don't love in theory. Yes, they could sign Lackey but he'll cost a lot and he doesn't have Buchholz's upside (let the freakout commense from those who say "If Buchholz can become Lackey then we're lucky".)

 

It sounds like the addition of Kelly and Westmoreland is actually the issue, less than Buchholz.

[example1]

The impact of losing Kelly and Buchholz could be lessened by signing Aroldis Chapman, if they need another high upside arm to have in the top tiers of their development pool.

 

Trade Buchholz and Kelly (keep Westmoreland)

Sign John Lackey

Sign Aroldis Chapman

 

That could work.

[a700hitter]

You called him a free-loader. Sounds like a personal attack to me.

 

Do you believe what Shaughnessy and Silverman wrote? If so, why? What evidence do you have to feel that way?

First of all, if you were to check the "What do you do?" thread, he describes his occupation as "freeloader", so I was just reminding him of how he described himself. Secondly, that post was in response to an unprovoked insulting post, i.e, I was defending myself. Nevertheless, you decided to throw in and defend the unprovoked attack. Piss off

[italstallianion]

The impact of losing Kelly and Buchholz could be lessened by signing Aroldis Chapman, if they need another high upside arm to have in the top tiers of their development pool.

 

Trade Buchholz and Kelly (keep Westmoreland)

Sign John Lackey

Sign Aroldis Chapman

 

That could work.

 

 

 

What about LF?

[a700hitter]

I'm pretty sure no one has ever made that claim but nice strawman regardless.

Read the thread. I was asking a ridiculous question in response to these two ridiculous questions that I was asked:

 

1. Do you really operate under the assumption that Theo is sitting around on his ass all offseason doing nothing?

 

2. Do you think Theo is just going to sit by and idly do nothing? That all he cares about is raking in the cash?

 

I believe that you originally asked these questions, and yes they are ridiculous.

 

Unless you want to discuss baseball or football today, again I'm telling you to piss off.

[example1]

What about LF?

 

That was merely the "get Adrian Gonzalez" plan. It didn't address LF. If they got Gonzalez and signed Holliday this would be quite a team.

[italstallianion]

That was merely the "get Adrian Gonzalez" plan. It didn't address LF. If they got Gonzalez and signed Holliday this would be quite a team.

 

 

 

Signing Holliday, Lackey, and Chapman? You think Boston could do it?

[example1]

I believe that you originally asked these questions, and yes they are ridiculous.

 

Unless you want to discuss baseball or football today, again I'm telling you to piss off.

 

I quoted those to you earlier, one was asked by Kilo. One by someone else. They asked independently of one another based on what you were saying.

 

just sayin'.

[a700hitter]

I quoted those to you earlier, one was asked by Kilo. One by someone else. They asked independently of one another based on what you were saying.

 

just sayin'.

Both questions were in the same vein. I am aware that he asked only one of them. They were both ridiculous, and I was surprised that in your post you had repeated his question and asked the second one.

[example1]

I believe that you originally asked these questions, and yes they are ridiculous.

 

I am aware that he asked only one of them. They were both ridiculous' date=' and I was surprised that in your post you had repeated his question and asked the second one.[/quote']

 

Can we stop with the notion that your opinion is the only one that matters here? If you think a question is ridiculous that doesn't mean the question is ridiculous. If someone else asks you something and you don't answer it (repeatedly) then it appears you're dodging the question.

 

You said to Kilo 5 posts ago "I beleve that you originally asked these questions" and then you say to me "I am aware that he asked only one of them", as if I am incapable of reading what you wrote.

 

You were caught being wrong or phrasing things poorly. Admit it and move on.

[Keeper]

The impact of losing Kelly and Buchholz could be lessened by signing Aroldis Chapman, if they need another high upside arm to have in the top tiers of their development pool.

 

Trade Buchholz and Kelly (keep Westmoreland)

Sign John Lackey

Sign Aroldis Chapman

 

That could work.

 

I would be on board with that. This is the problem with dealing with Hoyer. He knows the farm system so well that he won't settle for anything less than Boston's best. But I like the scenario you proposed.

[a700hitter]

Can we stop with the notion that your opinion is the only one that matters here? If you think a question is ridiculous that doesn't mean the question is ridiculous. If someone else asks you something and you don't answer it (repeatedly) then it appears you're dodging the question.

 

You said to Kilo 5 posts ago "I believe that you originally asked these questions" and then you say to me "I am aware that he asked only one of them", as if I am incapable of reading what you wrote.

 

You were caught being wrong or phrasing things poorly. Admit it and move on.

If you can't see that those two questions are what would be called argumentative, then you are not as smart as I thought you were. Those questions would not be allowed on cross-examination, because they are objectionable as "argumentative." If Dipre were here, he could back me up on this point. They are in the vein of the textbook argumentative question that we learn in Law School: "When did you stop beating your wife?" Asking if I think Theo sits around and does nothing is argumentative and does not lend itself to a full discussion of any issues. Sorry that you can't see that. BTW I answered both of your argumentative questions several posts ago. The answers were no and no. So, as you can see that I answered those ridiculous questions and was not dodging anything. Here's one for you: Do you think Epstein wears a halo? Do you see how ridiculous that is? It's just as ridiculous as you asking me if I think that Theo sits and does nothing.

 

BTW I wouldn't answer a valid question if it were included in a post that starts with a personal insult, nevermind an argumentative question following an insult. That's just me. If you want to talk, don't start with an insult. I'm not saying that you insulted me, but those questions which were almost identical in their offensiveness were initated by another member in a post where he was defending a personal insult against me. It was only because you asked them that I answered them at all. Again, the answers were no and no.