CrespoBlows

Again, you really don't know what you are talking about. I can't explain something I didn't get. I don't understand the comparison. It's a very bad one.

I don't recall Chamberlin being available for $30,000,000. I thought you were referring to the postseason, but you weren't. Makes the argument even weaker.

Using this as the crux of your argument is pretty weak. This is entirely speculative, and very improbable. Also, you could easily say, what if Clemens allows one more run then Lester in Game 7? This argument is still pretty stupid, but you have to address both sides of the issue. You're really grasping. The NBA is not MLB. This is another weak argument. Though, Chamberlin's first seven years are much more valuable than Russell's. He joins the Lakers with Baylor and West, and his PPG goes down. Not a shock.

Let's say that both pitchers pitch 100 IP exactly. Lester has a 4.95 ERA, and Clemens has a 3.50 ERA. Lester allows 55 runs, Clemens allows 35. That's a reasonable projection for both pitchers, no? If this is correct, the upgrade cost from Clemens to Lester is nearly $1.5 million per run scored. Those runs would probably translate to about two to three wins, and possibly four. The extra cost for those wins is $15 million per win, if the upgrade is two. $10 million per win if the upgrade is three, and $7.5 million if the upgrade is four. Yeah, there is a benefit to adding Clemens, but it looks like: COST > benefit

:lol: Best post of the year.

Sigh... You really don't get it? The Red Sox are currently paying a low penalty, due to being over the luxury tax. Signing Clemens would have forced the Red Sox to invest an extra $30 million dollars into the team. The Red Sox are over the luxury tax. Every single one of Clemens' dollars is taxed at 40%. J.D. Drew's? Probably only $3 million is taxed. Why do they have to make the argument? They don't have to. Everyone knows that Roger Clemens is getting an obscene amount of money. This move would have catapulted the Red Sox way over the luxury tax. They currently are only a few million dollars over the cap. Clemens would have put them a few twenty million over the cap. I don't get how you don't see this. This also would have hurt the Red Sox in terms of making future moves. I'd rather the Red Sox go trade for C.C Sabathia, Dontrelle Willis, extend Jonathan Papelbon, or sign Alex Rodriguez. When this happens, we'll address it. The Yankees have to win a World Series to validate this move. If we knock the Yankees out, and they have Clemens? It's a horrendous decision by the Yankees. Again, we'll address that when it happens. I have knowledge of the luxury tax, luxury tax rates, and that no player is worth $30 million dollars for 4 months. WE DO KNOW THAT TEAMS ARE SUBJECT TO PENALTIES WHEN THE CROSS THE LUXURY TAX LINE. THE RED SOX WOULD HAVE BEEN OVER IT, AND WOULD HAVE HAD TO INVEST $30 MILLION DOLLARS IN A 45 YEAR OLD FIVE INNING PITCHER. I DON'T NEED TO KNOW ANYTHING ELSE TO DECIDE THAT GIVING $30 MILLION DOLLARS TO A 45 YEAR OLD PITCHER IS A BAD MOVE

MESN, the Orioles network, has the final cost at just under $27 million. The Red Sox would have had to outbid the Yankees for Clemens, which is going to drive that $27 million up.

Yes, but you brought up Johnny Damon, which is a completely different case. That's where the confusion was started.

Look, I think that investing $28-30 million in Roger Clemens is a bad decision. Roger Clemens is a good pitcher, but I think the cost outweighs the benefit. Fair?

Pose that question to someone who believes that.

PAY ATTENTION MOTHER f***ER, BECAUSE I'M ONLY GOING TO DO THIS ONE MORE TIME 2007 RED SOX PAYROLL = $143 MILLION LUXURY TAX = $140 MILLION PENALTY FOR EXCEEDING THE LUXURY TAX = $1.2 MILLION The Red Sox don't have the additional wiggle room to continue spending past the luxury tax. We would have to invest $28-$30 million for FOUR MONTHS of Roger Clemens. NOTE - CLEMENS AVERAGED UNDER 6 INNINGS PER START LAST YEAR IN THE NL, WHAT THE f*** MAKES YOU THINK HE'S GOING TO EXCEED THAT IN THE AL WITH THE DH. FORGET THE f***ING LUXURY TAX, DOES ANYONE HERE SERIOUSLY BELIEVE THAT GIVING ROGER CLEMENS IN BETWEEN $28 and $30 MILLION DOLLARS IS A GOOD INVESTMENT? Oh, just you? Seriously, I like your idea of trading the entire farm system before investing that kind of money into a 45 year old pitcher. OK, BUT BEFORE WE WERE TALKING IN TERMS OF ABSOLUTE ADVANTAGE, WHICH IS DIFFERENT THAN COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGE. YOU EVEN THREW IN THE DAMON COMPARISON FOR THE 1,000 TIME, WHICH WOULD INDICATE THAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT ABSOLUTE ADVANTAGE. FOR THE LOVE OF CHRIST BE CONSISTENT. K THNX!

No, he went to the place that offered more money. If Boston had offered $28.1 million, he would have signed with the Red Sox. Money. How can you say that? You're going to pass up $18.667 million, over $9 or $10? Which is why he signed with New York.

No, you said the Red Sox had gotten weaker. That's like saying the Yankees got weaker because the Red Sox signed Free Agent X. That isn't true. If the Yankees had taken Clemens away from the Red Sox, the yes, the Red Sox would have gotten weaker, but that isn't the case.

Just this season.

No one said that. Everyone said that Clemens would be an improvement, just the price is not justified at $30 million. The Red Sox have nor gained or lost anyone. How are they weaker? Comparatively? No one said that.

The Yankees are above the luxury tax. They will be paying $28 million for four months of Roger Clemens. Clemens, the 45 year old right-hander, who is a five inning pitcher in the AL East? Or Clemens, the Cy Young award winner? Again, I didn't say that Lester will match Clemens, I said that he is a better bet at $300,000 then Clemens at $30,000,000. Clemens likely isn't going to dominate. He will need his bullpen to pitch at least three or four innings every start to help him out. Again, we would have needed to go AT LEAST $30 million to reel in Clemens. That is insanity.

Phillies win 8-5. Lincecum was a bit wild today, no? Had flashes of a dominating pitcher, he probably could be a shut down closer right now. Anyway onto tommorow. Nationals @ Brewers. Matt Chico and his 2.06 WHIP vs the streaking Brewers. There is something wrong with baseball if the Nats win tommorow.

I like what I see from Hughes, but I haven't seen Buchholtz pitch. Can't comment.

$28 million for a six inning pitcher? I can't justify that price. It's also likely we would have surpassed the Yankees offer in order to reel him in. Last year, Clemens was actually at 5.96 IP/S. I don't see that number going up with the DH. He happens to find himself in the AL East, where the other four offenses are very, very good. The Yankees smoked our offer. They f***ing raped it. He would have gotten about $8 to $9 million in Boston. He's probably going to get $20 million in New York. The Red Sox should definitely go get an upgrade for Tavarez, but $20 million for a fifth starter? I'll take a chance that Lester comes close for $300,000, and I'll invest the other $19,000,000 in someone like A-Rod.

Do you really think the Red Sox should have gone $30 million for Clemens?

Helms is atrocious with the glove.

Went with the Phillies. The Giants can hope that Lincecum is the real deal, but I'll wait. Besides, the Giants lose way, way too much offense without Bonds.