Austin Jackson

[Dipre]

And I mentioned three prospects who are better than him, with better grade and more potential.

 

Wait, I'll help. ROY means Rookie of the Year, and it's April. Need a graph?

 

If season ended right now' date=' Jackson is rookie of year[/b'].

 

Reading comprehension is essential, sir.

[Jasonbay44]

And I mentioned three prospects who are better than him, with better grade and more potential.

 

Wait, I'll help. ROY means Rookie of the Year, and it's April. Need a graph?

 

You are an idiot. Jackson is current leader for rookie of year, CURRENT. Where did I say it wasn't rookie of year and that it was decided in a month? Oh, thats right. I said he was current leader for rookie of year. Thus far, Jackson has been best rookie in AL, meaning he is early favorite for rookie of year. I don't know how else to explain it to you.

 

Oh, and ill help you, its May. Need a graph and/or a calendar?

 

Reading comprehension is essential' date=' sir.[/quote']

 

Hurray for people who can read! :thumbsup:

[SoxSport]

Saw this kid play in Scranton last summer. I think I wrote a post about it then. Against Pawtucket, which had a bad team last year.

Jackson batted 1st or 2nd at Scranton, played CF, and looked good when I saw him. Patient at the plate.Looked like a ballplayer. Was hitting around .300 there.

So far so good in Detroit. The kid has surprised some. Put right in leading off and producing. We'll see if it lasts.

For all those NY media types who gloated about them getting Granderson, the Yankees may have traded away a very good young player who has been better than Granderson so far--and a lot cheaper.

[Lester82]

Jackson, who New York dealt to Detroit in the Curtis Granderson deal, became the first player in the majors with 50 hits this season.

 

Good for you, AJax

[Chamomile]

Jackson' date=' who New York dealt to Detroit in the Curtis Granderson deal, became the first player in the majors with 50 hits this season. [/b']

 

Good for you, AJax

 

He just scored the go ahead run to beat the Yankees this evening. It must suck to have your former top prospect who you traded for a player who's sucked and is on the DL, be the hitter who beat you.

[Dipre]

He just scored the go ahead run to beat the Yankees this evening. It must suck to have your former top prospect who you traded for a player who's sucked and is on the DL' date=' be the hitter who beat you.[/quote']

 

Dude, it's May.

[Chamomile]

Dude' date=' it's May.[/quote']

 

And? Austin Jackson is talented, young and under team control for 6 years.

[Dipre]

And? Austin Jackson is talented' date=' young and under team control for 6 years.[/quote']

 

Never said otherwise, but Granderson is also talented, and injuries are not something you can predict. You can't judge the trade in May. I suggest you stop beating that drum, because it's honestly ridiculous.

[Chamomile]

Never said otherwise' date=' but Granderson is also talented, and injuries are not something you can predict. You can't judge the trade in May. I suggest you stop beating that drum, because it's honestly ridiculous.[/quote']

 

Do you honestly think that the Yankees are better off this year with Granderson on the DL for the next month than they would have been with Damon and Austin Jackson this year?

[Dipre]

Do you honestly think that the Yankees are better off this year with Granderson on the DL for the next month than they would have been with Damon and Austin Jackson this year?

 

Injuries can't be predicted.

 

Do you honestly think the Red Sox are better with Cameron on the DL than with Bay manning LF?

 

Hindisght is 20/20, and it's too early to judge trade/signings.

[Chamomile]

Injuries can't be predicted.

 

Do you honestly think the Red Sox are better with Cameron on the DL than with Bay manning LF?

 

Hindisght is 20/20, and it's too early to judge trade/signings.

 

I never said injuries could be predicted and if we did trade our top prospect in addition to letting Bay go to sign Cameron, I'd be pissed. But we didn't. AND we used the money Bay would have cost to also sign Lackey. Not a very good comparison.

[Dipre]

I never said injuries could be predicted and if we did trade our top prospect in addition to letting Bay go to sign Cameron' date=' I'd be pissed. But we didn't. AND we used the money Bay would have cost to also sign Lackey. Not a very good comparison.[/quote']

 

Austin Jackson was not the Yankees top prospect, which is the key to the argument. With the Yankees, money is never an issue.

[Dipre]

He just scored the go ahead run to beat the Yankees this evening. It must suck to have your former top prospect who you traded for a player who's sucked and is on the DL' date=' be the hitter who beat you.[/quote']

 

Oh, and you did use the injury as part of your bashing attempt on the trade.

 

Objectivity: Learn it.

[Chamomile]

Oh, and you did use the injury as part of your bashing attempt on the trade.

 

Objectivity: Learn it.

 

When did I ever say I didn't use the fact that Granderson's out for a month as part of my reasoning for why the Yankees would have been better off with Jackson/Damon than Granderson? In fact, didn't I say the opposite?

 

You're all over the place and have your criticisms of my points are based on stuff I never said. In this case, you're arguing the opposite of what I said. I'll bet you know what happens when you assume you know what someone else means, so I won't bother spelling it out for you.

[Dipre]

When did I ever say I didn't use the fact that Granderson's out for a month as part of my reasoning for why the Yankees would have been better off with Jackson/Damon than Granderson?

 

You're all over the place and have your criticisms of my points are based on stuff I never said. I think you know what happens when you assume you know what someone else means, right?

 

I know exactly what you mean. What is all over the place is your usual beat the drum attempt. Read what you've said carefully.

 

You use Granderson's injury, i say injuries can't be predicted, you say you've never said injuries can be predicted, but if you know so, why use it as part of the argument? It's retarded, and it's a point you've attacked when Yankee fans have used it against the Red Sox in the past. Consistency. You're all over the place.

 

You're saying the Yankees would have been better off with Damon/Jackson than Granderson.:

 

A) It's May.

 

B ) You know as well as i do that Jaskcon doesn't sniff the Majors with Damon in the Bronx, and if he does, there's a strong chance he wouldn't have a .500 BABIP and 38.3 LD%, which you know as well as i do is not sustainable.

 

Try some semblance on consistency and objectivity on your third round through the site.

[Chamomile]

I know exactly what you mean. What is all over the place is your usual beat the drum attempt. Read what you've said carefully.

 

You use Granderson's injury, i say injuries can't be predicted, you say you've never said injuries can be predicted, but if you know so, why use it as part of the argument? It's retarded, and it's a point you've attacked when Yankee fans have used it against the Red Sox in the past. Consistency. You're all over the place.

 

You're saying the Yankees would have been better off with Damon/Jackson than Granderson.:

 

A) It's May.

 

B ) You know as well as i do that Jaskcon doesn't sniff the Majors with Damon in the Bronx, and if he does, there's a strong chance he wouldn't have a .500 BABIP and 38.3 LD%, which you know as well as i do is not sustainable.

 

Try some semblance on consistency and objectivity on your third round through the site.

 

I'd love to know exactly what drum you think it is that I'm beating that's so ridiculous. What point have I made that you disagree with?

 

Just because you argue points I've never made over and over and over again doesn't make you the objective, reasonable one.

[Dipre]

I'd love to know exactly what drum you think it is that I'm beating that's so ridiculous. What point have I made that you disagree with?

 

Just because you argue points I've never made over and over and over again doesn't make you the objective, reasonable one.

 

Cop-out.

 

Agree to disagree, only time will tell.

[Chamomile]

Cop-out.

 

Agree to disagree, only time will tell.

 

Agree to disagree about what?

 

You've yet to state anything that I've actually said that you disagree with. I don't even know what you're trying to argue.

[Dipre]

Agree to disagree about what?

 

You've yet to state anything that I've actually said that you disagree with. I don't even know what you're trying to argue.

 

Do i have to tell you?

 

Allow me to spell it out:

 

It's retarded to grade a trade as failed on one and a half months of baseball just because the Yankees made it.

[Chamomile]

Do i have to tell you?

 

Allow me to spell it out:

 

It's retarded to grade a trade as failed on one and a half months of baseball just because the Yankees made it.

 

This is exactly what I'm talking about. Point out the place where I said the trade was failed.

[yankees228]

This is exactly what I'm talking about. Point out the place where I said the trade was failed.

 

You don't think you implied that the Yankees made a mistake?

[diony]

He did it with his last account.

[Chamomile]

You don't think you implied that the Yankees made a mistake?

 

I didn't just imply that the Yankees made a mistake. I said that they would have been better off with Damon on the team and Austin Jackson in their farm system than they are this year with Granderson. As for the Granderson trade itself, who knows how that will work out. Granderson's under contract with the Yankees for 3 more years.