yankeessuck013

i was quoting the article...

I think the Twins are now starting to overplay there hand a little bit I think there underestimating the fact that whatever team trades for him has to give him a 6 year 150 million dollar deal and even though hes arguably the best pitcher in the game that is going to drive his value down but you can't fault them for trying to get as much as they can. But lets face it w/ that contract demand this is a 2 pony race unless the name J.Reyes starts getting tossed around The Twins have to be careful b/c if Boston or NY shoots over to Oak and lands Haren you can expect the offer for Santana to go down. I mean if NY landed Haren tomorrow I would expect the red sox to immediately pull ellsbury off the table.

It doesn't really matter anymore... You don't think VT's offense has improved over the course of the season you never extensively watched VT play. Which is okay because not everyone can watch every team. Just know that we went from anemic in the first half of the season to, at the very least, productive towards the end. I never said VT's offense was prolific, just that it has improved vastly over the course of the season. The offensive line has gelled, the new two QB system is working well enough, and Brandon Ore has been much better and is finally healthy. Meanwhile LSU's defense has went from stellar, to... well... less than stellar. Make no mistake, teams don't lose in triple OT because they can't hit a 2 point conversion, they lose twice in triple OT because their defense can't do anything to stop the other offense in the red zone. It's that simple. Where has the tiger defense gone? Fortunately, I really think they won't need it against the Buckeyes. Unless they get in triple OT. And as I said, logically you put LSU into the title game, and they've done that. I just made the case for VT disregarding the fact that VT lost to them in the beginning of the season. It's a tough case to make and that's why they were given absolutely no chance by any of the talking heads, but I think I made my case pretty well. As for Kentucky and Arkansas being capable of winning the ACC. Maybe. I'm not going to argue that the ACC is as good as the SEC, but I do think VT is better than Arkansas and Kentucky and would beat them both on a neutral field.

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/yankees/2007/12/02/2007-12-02_twins_not_wowed_by_phil_hughes_package_w.html

But the point is, why should they jump them now and why were they not ahead of VT last week? If they were behind VT in the computer rankings and the polls last week, why does a LSU win against a #14 team get them ahead of the Hokies after a VT win against the #11 team? Was there no reason why VT was ranked ahead of LSU last week? Are the polls just for show? And do I really even need to ask that question? OK maybe LSU should go to the title over them, but theres something to say about losing 2 games to LSU and BC rather than losing 2 games to unranked teams. I understand VT lost big time to LSU in September. But that was September. VT is leagues ahead of where they were offensively at that point in the season, and the inept offense turned out to really be the huge weakness against LSU (not moving the ball = no rest for the D = big points against). Games in the beginning of the season have almost no bearing on what can happen later. Hell, look at Tennessee-Cal... Tennessee goes on the play for the SEC title while Cal loses to Stanford? What do I think it should be? I have no idea. You can make the case for so many 2 loss teams, though the talking heads only want LSU or USC. Except Mark May, a talking head with some sense, thinks Oklahoma should also get consideration. This is a good site. They project VT will be #1 in the computer rankings, but LSU beats them in the polls and gets the NC bid. http://tellshowbcs.com/

They still lost to 2 unranked teams, while Hawaii would be undefeated, and as I stated above, the current system is designed to reward the teams who lose the least for the most part.

It's absolutely to impossible to predict who will be in the game but Virginia Tech is 11-2 and fresh off an ACC championship game victory over #11 Boston College. They've also defeated Georgia Tech (7-4), Florida State (7-4) and #16 Virginia (9-2) in recent weeks whereas LSU lost to an unranked 7-4 Arkansas team. One thing we can all agree on, arguments can be made for a LOT of teams... A lot of teams are not going to be happy. But, the way I understand the system, it's designed to reward the teams who lose the least, for the most part. I can't justify putting a 2 loss team in there, especially when one was a BAD loss, over an undefeated team and a team that only lost once, just at the wrong time of the year. That's just me, though. FWIW, if Hawaii knocks off Washington tonight they'll be undefeated and the way the season has gone, why not?! And, I actually would have no problem if they put Hawaii in . I wouldn't do it myself. But they F'd the system up so bad that Hawaii has just as much - if not more - of a deserving case as anyone else.

OK, I change my mind. Haha. For me it would be Ohio State and VaTech. Why is no one else talking about Va Tech? Kansas lost their "semifinal" last week. Georgia didn't even play for their conference title. LSU just lost two weeks ago to an unranked team. Their 2nd loss. Hawaii just doesn't have the schedule to make the case (and they are losing at home to Washington) Oklahoma has two losses against teams that were very inferior. USC has two losses. But more importantly, one was to Stanford. At home. Va Tech was ranked ahead of both LSU and USC going into today. They beat the #11 ranked team to win their conference title. They avenged one of their two losses by doing so, which makes it equal to having only one loss to me, just like Ohio State. I know they got hammered by LSU, but that was very early in the season and the LSU reasoning above lowers them in my voting. So, it's close for me between LSU and VT. But I'll go with VT vs. OSU.

MLB Trade Rumors: UPDATE, 12-1-07 at 10:30pm: Yanks and Twins are haggling over the third guy - Twins want Horne or Austin Jackson per Jon Heyman. The Yanks are apparently holding out on that front, trying to retain some dignity. Peter Abraham says the Yanks will also slap a deadline on their offer and then turn their attention to Dan Haren. Concurrently, the Red Sox will only give up Ellsbury if they get more than Santana back. How about making this thing a real blockbuster, getting Joe Nathan involved? Imagine a 7-8-9 combo of Gagne-Nathan-Papelbon (if Gagne were to accept arb). Peter Abraham is saying the Sox aren't serious though.

If I was voting, I coiuldn't put Kansas in because I would look at last week's game vs. Mizzou as a "semifinal" game for them -- and they lost.

Georgia vs OSU is my pick.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but he has a buyout in his contract that allows him to go to UM... Why would he ask for that in his contract, if he's not even gonna think about exercising it?

Again, I do not know how credibile or reliable that site is

http://mlb-rumors.blogspot.com/ They are reporting that we put Buchholz in the deal.

my bet is that buchholz is involved, not jacoby. but i do wonder if the twins made any new additions to the deal like the sox wanted.

both

I was listening to the Baseball Show on WFAN with Ed Randall. And they are reporting that Jon Heyman of SI was on the show and he told Randall that the Twins are not as interested in Hughes, and would take the deal with the Red Sox if it includes either Buchholz OR Ellsbury, and they are talking deal. I can't speak to its reliability, just reporting what i heard on the WFAN in NY

I gotta agree with a700 here, you can't compare melky by looking at numbers of past players. The game is everchanging and players need to make adjustments in order to be successful in this day and age. Comparing Melky to Yaz is assinine IMO.

IMO, I think it was jsut a negotiation ploy.

UPDATE, 12-01-07 at 1pm: Olney now says the Yanks don't have any serious interest in Loretta, and haven't spoken to him in over a month.

nothing that we didn't already know... UPDATE, 11-29-07 at 10:30pm: The Yankees' offer stands at Ian Kennedy, Melky Cabrera, and maybe Jose Tabata. Phil Hughes is a big upgrade over Kennedy, and the Twins are insisting on him. Meanwhile the Red Sox are still pushing Coco Crisp while the Twins are holding out for Jacoby Ellsbury. If one of the teams cracks on Hughes or Ellsbury this thing might get done.

There have been reports on MLB Radio on XM that the Twins are now leaning towards holding out until the winter meetings to make the deal cant say I disagree w/ that There in or should be in no rush to trade him especially now w/ rumors floating that the Angels may abandoned there M.Caberea pursuit and focus in on on Santana From my understanding they have been offered some good packages of prospects but most of them are based on Quanity and the Twins are more interested in Quality. As in 2 major league ready prospects w/ all star potential w/in a year or two and that is where most of the deals are falling apart Another thing that might also be holding things up is Santana wants 7 years for 170 and by the sounds of it is not willing to budge much on that number. W/ the innings he has on his arm already and the way he finished last year that may seem like a hard number to take. But w/ his full NTC he can bassically write his own check. from the NY Times: If the deal gets done w/ Crisp the Red Sox will have to end up eating about 75% of whats left on his deal

Probably 5- 7 Years. He wants 6/150.

The New York Times reports that the Yankees are sticking to an offer of Ian Kennedy, Melky Cabrera and at least one minor leaguer for Johan Santana. The Times believes Jose Tabata could be the minor leaguer. The Twins are holding out for Phil Hughes over Kennedy. Unless the Yankees put Robinson Cano in the deal, it's hard to see them getting Santana without trading Hughes. Joba Chamberlain is completely off limits.

UPDATE, 11-29-07 at 8pm: Despite what Jon Heyman said, the Boston Globe's Nick Cafardo seems to think the Red Sox are still in the lead for Santana. It would be the package named below by Olney. Nothing is done yet, as Santana's agent hasn't been approached about an extension. Meanwhile Cafardo indicates that the Yankees may part with Robinson Cano after all.