example1

Yeah, I guess I'm not sure one way or the other. Sometimes pitchers just need a change of scene, and Lidge would only need to set-up. If the deal is cheap enough I might take a chance on him, even though he sucks currently.

Any chance the Sox make a run at Lidge to help set-up?

I wasn't saying that he should only be that late inning speed replacement. That's something he certainly offers though. He's a switch hitter who can play all three positions and gives the lineup tremendous versitility. I also wouldn't rush Jacoby if given the choice, but at what point do you keep a tremendous athelete who CAN hit MLB pitching from doing so?

Argh. Felix is a tough assignment. If the sox can pull one out against him I will be impressed.

I feel like Ellsbury could be the type of player the Sox need on this team. I think he is a better leadoff hitter than Lugo, he would bump either Youkilis or Lugo back in the order and could make crisp a late-inning speed replacement and another guy who can play all three positions in the outfield as needed. I know there are a TON of arguments against it, but this team is missing that spark near the top (as much as I like what Lugo has provided so far).

Middle relief sucks. Middle relief by definition sucks. If someone is good in middle relief its a great find, but they don't last long before becoming a closer. I think about Linebrink, Duscherer, Zumaya, etc., and they are in a pretty rare class. The biggest thing you can do is to NOT WALK PEOPLE. Then its hitting your spots. Papelbon is an absolute savior. Seriously. There isn't another reliever in the league who puts people down the way he does. Absolute domination, a man among boys, etc., He sits down the BEST hitters in just about any lineup. All I can say is WOW! And thank god we have Papelbon. THANK GOD WE HAVE PAPELBON.

So far so good. :thumbsup:

Everyone here seems optimistic. Talksox.com certainly has a division between the optimists and the pessimists. Of course, neither is right all the time but I too, fit into the optimist side. We haven't seen Ortiz really hit at all this season yet and we all know that will change. I expect a good game tonight. Historically it seems that we do fine against Texas when our better pitchers are pitching (as do most teams) but we struggle when we start throwing our 4 and 5 at them. Wakefield traditionally gets crushed, and their high-powered offense makes pretty short work of the likes of Tavarez. This isn't true of every team. It seems that some teams are competitive against every pitcher with less of a discrepency between best pitchers and 4th or 5th, and others can be overwhelmed by 1st 2nd but destroy the weakest starters. I don't know... it seems that way at least. I expect Schilling to come out and be dominant. Prediction: 6-3 Red Sox, Ortiz gets his first bomb.

Yankees lose. THAAAA Yankees lose.

Every single freaking Yankees game goes like this it seams. Yankees fall behind by quite a few, work counts, put guys on, pitchers lose strike zone, yankee hitters score runs. I would like to just watch a game where the yankees go down quietly... and Michael Kay does too. Argh!

Craziness. Pettitte in in relief in the 5th game of the year? Is this team's pitching hurting that much?

Crespo, my poiint was that you changed the term from "Loaded" referring to an assessment of a team at the beginning of a season to "dominant" by pointing to the final records of teams that were dominant. It was a weak rhetorical device and something I've come to expect from your abrasive-ass. There have been plenty of teams that were called "loaded" before the season but not "dominant" afterwards. How about last year's Yankees team? Do you think they were called loaded by anyone on April 7th of 2006? Yes. They most certainly were. Farnsworth to set up Mariano, Damon to lead off, a lineup of Damon, Jeter, Giambi, A-Rod, Matsui, Sheffield, etc., Does that fit your particular definition of loaded? No, because they didn't end up being dominant. They were in 2nd for much of the season and weakly fizzled out of the playoffs. Does your definition of loaded dictate every conversation and discussion about teams? No. Does your style of arguing annoy people and make it less likely that an intelligent discussion will take place? Yes. Clearly. I don't give a flying f*** if this team is loaded and I don't give a flying f*** about your self-rightious opinion. I think this is potentially a great team. I think the "weak" spots you point to can certainly be as weak as the weak spots on those dominant teams. Ausmus is primarily defensive? Wow, Varitek seems to do a pretty good job behind the plate. Again, the fact that the very first team you listed (the White Sox of 05) was shown to be full of holes both before the season and afterwards indicates that even you, oh mighty pontificator of all things baseball, didn't have a grasp on what you meant by loaded. So it makes me think you're just arguing to be an ass and not trying to prove a point... that's how I've been approaching your posts ever since. The only point you seem to try to prove is that I'm full of s*** and don't know what I'm talking about... about a term that is not only subjective and important only to you, but which you have changed to fit your argument and defined clearly once, but poorly. I don't except your premise that a LOADED team = a DOMINANT team, because that would keep one from EVER making a claim about whether a team is loaded going into a season, which was the whole point of this discussion. If the proof is only in the pudding, so to speak, then calling a team loaded before a season is impossible yet you hear it all the time and it was the crux of this discussion. Instead of arguing "a loaded team is a dominant one and we haven't seen if this team is dominant yet" you said, essentially, "this team isn't loaded because they are NOT dominant". I said 5 games was too early to make such an assessment and you start calling me full of s***. Do you understand that? I expect nothing but an abrasive answer and I'm telling you this time, I WILL NOT RESPOND. The only reason I keep writing is to refrain from giving you the satisfaction of thinking you 'won' some argument where you changed the terminology wantonly and insulted an otherwise good poster here with insults like being full of s*** and the like. Very simply: If LOADED = DOMINANT and DOMINANT = Won a ton of games then LOADED = Won a ton of games You can't assess your definition of Loaded until you see the team's final record, yet you keep saying you can. Are you saying that it is absolutely IMPOSSIBLE for this team to win 102 games this season? I'm not ready to say that yet, 5 games into the season. You will get support for your view here among the traditionally conservative people like a700 and the like, but that doesn't mean that the baseball gods can't give Crisp a good season, have Donnelly back to form, get Timlin back at 90% and put Lester back into the rotation (he was hitting 96 yesterday aparently) to make this team a very, very good club. That's all I'm saying man. Settle down and get a life.

This is the stupidest discussion I've ever spent a fair amount of time on. You point to some good teams. You obviously changed the wording from "loaded" (which is a subjective and slippery term) to "dominant" (which is an after-thought assessment) and thus set up an argument that you can't lose. You point to dominant teams, so what? Will there be dominant teams this year? Yes. Did you name any of them as "loaded" when I asked earlier "which teams would you point to that are dominant?". No. All the teams this year and in years past have had weaknesses, often with questions about the bullpen, the offense produced by a player or two in the lineup, etc., Given that this discuss started with SOMEONE ELSE using the term "loaded" and I responded to HIM, and now you're changing which word we're talking about I just can't stand arguing with you about a non-subject. This team is as well equiped as any other to make the playoffs and win. That was my point. By referring to a team as "not being loaded" I took that to mean they weren't going to be able to beat other teams who were loaded. You say loaded teams don't start Julian Tavarez, Coco Crisp and Jason Varitek then you list a team that has, just for one quick example, Michael Tucker as the starting RF for ATL, with a .745 OPS and .244 AVG. I really just think you're bitching about guys you don't like on the team in an attempt to make yourself seem smart. Dan Wilson: .708 OPS. How about Al Martin in 100 games with his .715 OPS? Brad Ausmus and his .713 OPS? Tony Pena and his .678 OPS? You shoot your argument in the foot time and time again. If your point is that either "dominant" or "loaded" teams don't have weak spots I think you should look again at what you provided. Again, though, I've been saying that for a few pages now; so if you want to continue putting out thoughtful posts that take a lot of time, be my guest. I'm just done with your argumentitiveness.

I think even J.C. would have been out of ideas for the sox there!

Wily Maze Hays with the catch in CF to finish the game. Slammin sammy happy with his juiced up performance, barely able to be contained in that MLB Authentic Jersey.

Nice pitch there. This team looks a bit lackadazical. EDIT: Sorry for the quadruple post.

Manny has looked a little slow on the trigger so far this season. Of course, he's really smacked a few balls to so I guess I'm not concerned. Let's hope Schll comes out heated tomorrow..

What the f*** is Nelson Cruz doing standing on the track in Right-center?

Why is Hinske hitting here? I mean, he got a hit, but it still doesn't make sense to me... good history against him or what?

It's only a game. It's only a game. It's only a game. Right now this team is making me nervous with their inabillity to get rallys going. Of course, baseball isn't meant to be played in 35 degree temperatures this regularly--not an excuse, but it kind of eliminates the 'benefit' of playing a game in a warmer climate to start the season.