example1

As far as I know he doesn't have a split. I asked probably 5 times on this site this summer WHY THE HELL DOESN"T BECKETT HAVE A SPLIT? He has Papelbon and Schilling to learn from. My only thought is the desire to keep his elbow in good shape?? :dunno:

Imagine the slow-footed Bonds playing in the vast Fenway RF or Papi playing 1B then. The only way Bonds can come is if he suddenly percieves Boston as a non-racist town (whether it is or not doesn't matter, just his perception) and if Manny is no longer the Sox LF. Also the Sox will need to pay like 15m for his services (and 1m for his drugs). No thanks.

The Sox weren't down 7-0 in game 4 though.

They should dump Torre, move A-Rod and get a dominant pitcher. RJ is not dominant, Wang is good but not dominant, and Mussina is good but he doesn't blow hitters away. They should also stop dumping the 1st round picks for 4th or 5th OF'ers like Abreu. This so-called greatest lineup ever is hampered by the fact that they don't have pitchers who can SHUT DOWN an above average offense like Detroit's consistently. Watching this makes me happy to have the names Beckett, Papelbon, Lester (god willing), Buchholz, Bowden, Bard, Delcarmen and Hansen coming up. They're not locks, but they're the basis of an inexpensive and potentially dominant pitching team. Spend Red Sox money on the offense and you're looking at a good team.

What the hell are you talking about? 2003: Yankees: 152,749,814 Red Sox: 99,946,500 difference: 53 million or so 2004: Yankees: 182,835,513 Red Sox: 125,208,542 difference: 57 million or so 2006: Yankees: 194, 663,079 Red Sox: 120,099,824 difference: 74 million or so So, what the hell are you talking about saying "A term which should not be used today because the salaries of the teams are very similar."? Why would you tell me what terms should not be used, when you don't know what the hell you're talking about? :dunno:

Woooooohhh hooooooooooo! Go tigers!

yeah carlos!

I'm starting to feel like I'm losimg my personal integrity. I'm sitting here watching this game, and there's f***ing Giambi. Huge and sweaty and all roided (sorry, HGH'd) up. It is mentioned over and over again, and nobody defends him, nobody denies it, Sox fans, Yankees fans, nobody. This is a guy who has been pumping himself full of roids since the early-mid 90's, he came off them last year and was horrible. Now, he's f***ing Babe Ruth again ripping balls all over the place, his eyes buldging out of his head, veins pumping full of HGH. I'm just sick of it. It's one thing to say that we can't know who was on them BEFORE the whole BALCO scandal, but to have someone right before your eyes that is using them and really helping his team compete is just sad.

I don't f***ing get it. I have supported this FO and Tito at nearly every turn since they took over. I'm impressed by a team that can win almost 95 games for three straight seasons. I'm impressed by a team that consistently sends 3+ guys to the all-star game, a team that scores 900+ runs for three straight seasons. All I've heard about Jackson, nearly every single time they show him on TV or discuss him in the booth, they talk about how great he is. They discuss how he "turned this team around" or "he had a lot to do with the development of Ortiz", I never heard anyone complain about him. His nickname was Papa Jack, for crying out loud. Who fires a "Papa Jack". Seriously, though, I don't know what they're doing. What are they hoping to get now? Is Ted Williams reincarnated as a hitting coach or something? Does the FO believe that Jackson could have gotten more from his players than he did this season? If so then how can they also discuss the injuries as being the main problem? Is he somehow involved in the Manny saga (i.e., publically defending the man-ram)? I just don't get it. Is there a hitting coach that will allow them to sign someone in particular or did they disagree with his hitting philosophy (which, apparently, was 'score 900+ runs this year')? How could you disagree with that? I don't know. He seemed like a good guy. He couldn't have wanted/been owned that much money and he was important in turning that team around.

I say get all 3. Just spend the money and make it happen FO; make all three an offer they can't refuse.

a) he WANTS to start. He probably won't hate being here if he gets to start. he already "bounced" from starter to closer. Do you think that was a bad move? Did that hurt him or spoil his ability to perform? Look man, you have ONE chance to do this. Either he's a closer forever or he begins his career as a SP next year and still has the option of closing if that doesn't work. The longer you wait the more risky it is.

You have to be a specialer kind of pitcher to win 20 games a year. IF Papelbon is capable of that then we have to use him there. Nobody knows if he is or not, but you have to try. He's young enough to be able to move back to the closer role for his age 27 season if necessary. Personally I would like to see the Sox get the best available closer and let that person battle it out with Foulke for the closer-role. I would like to have Papelbon slated to pitch 6-8 innings every 5th day and possibly winning 16-20 games NEXT year (with better things to come after that). I think that Papelbon RE-learned how to pitch in really big situations, focusing when it really mattered. We all acknowledge how amazing he can be when he is totally in that "veins full of ice" mentality. He appears as good as Mariano at those times. Now if he can apply that as a starter you're looking at a guy who, very much like Pedro or Clemens or RJ in their primes, can not only get MOST guys out, but can also get guys out at the most important moments of the game. We all would love it if Papelbon could be both the best closer and the best starter on our team, but he can't be both. I would love to see the Sox go after Brad Lidge in a move, perhaps part of trading Manny. Get Lidge, resign Foulke and keep working with Hansen over the offseason. Lidge, even in his more questionable state of this season, is better than most MLB closers, including guys on semi-successful teams like Bob Wickman or Todd Jones. In any case you have to remain flexible enough to use your guys where they are best. If Papelbon WANTS to be a starter--even after all of his success and fanfare as a closer--perhaps he feels like that is where he would be most effective. If Schilling pitches like he did this year and Beckett pitches like he occasionally did (and he certainly CAN more often) and Papelbon turns into what we think he can, then you're looking at three "should win" starters on our team. I would take that rotation along with Detroits and Minnesota's as one of the best in baseball. Add another good starter (say Matsuzaka or Zito or Schmidt) and you're looking at 4 "should wins". Put Wakefield or Tavarez or Hansack or Lester in that spot and you're golden. Alot of that depends on the bullpen though, so of course you're right to be concerned about moving a guy like Papelbon out of there. I think it will be easier to build a competent '04 caliber bullpen than to find a SP of Papelbon's potential quality.

Good/Great team: Wily Mo hitting 6th or 7th Questionable/vulnerable team: Wily Mo hitting 5th

That sucks for Pedro.

You're as cold as Papelbon's glare. But you're right. I could see keeping him in a Gabe Kaplar type role. If we need a pinch hitter late in a playoff game with the bases loaded and a reliever in, I would want Trot over a lot of other players. If he doesn't play that much then injuries could be less likely. If Trot wants to stick around for 2.5m/for 2 years then I'd keep him. This season depth has been a problem and Nixon will probably go and make some team a little better... if only by his presence and attitude.