ORS

Dyson and Walker are on the perimeter. Robinson got to benefit from being the 3rd guy the other team would pay attention to in the paint, behind Thabeet and Adrien. We'll see how he handles attention from the defense. Nice attempt to deflect there at the end. I fail to see how Duke's recent struggles somehow validate Calhoun's gameplan given the squad he had this year.

A f***ing my wife retort? Nice one, Costanza. Jerk store!

Per your words in the trade thread, Huff was available and you were fine picking up a stopgap when questioned about your 3B position until Arod returns. I sent you an offer, and you replied that you can't trade Huff because you need him until Arod gets back. This type of outright flip-flopping tends to turn people off from sending further proposals and wanting to negotiate with you.

Robinson is going to dominate? His game is suited to being the 5th option, the floater, that the other team forgets about. If Thabeet opts for the draft, and Adrien's a senior, then he's no longer forgotten about. He's a tremendous athlete, so I expect him to still have an impact, but he'll struggle IMO when he becomes part of the focus of a team's defensive gameplan. It's a shame, because he's blessed with the prototypical body for an NBA swingman, but he lacks the game. Unless something changes, like some serious work on his ball handling and outside shot, expect to be disappointed on that expectation. They absolutely had more talent, but it wasn't very diverse. They had one player with an outside game and he didn't show up until the last two minutes. They were much more athletic at every position, and they dominated the paint. I just described G'Town from the early 80's. I didn't see a G'Town type gameplan, though.

Nova isn't answering the phone, I take it? It's really not their fault, though. When Lawson and Ellington are on their game, combined with the rest of their depth, forget about it.

Well, as far as getting anything out of that race for basketball, it sure isn't the Irish. Calhoun had significantly more talent on the floor, but his gameplan came up small. Adrien in the high post looked good early in the game, but MSU adjusted and Calhoun had no counter. I know you are big on insisting Calhoun's the best in the country, Crunch, but I think the true best was on the other bench. The more I watch Izzo's teams, the more impressed I am at how well coached they are. EDIT: I say this with 1:45 left and the spread at 10. Even if they come back, my comments still apply.

Use one of these, and you'll find one. http://getfantasticdeals.com/library/ScallopedMirror.jpg

All well and good. That said, the "he got bigger from age 21 to age (6 or more years later)" observation needs to die. Save a few people who appear on The Biggest Loser, this is true of everyone, particularly athletes engaged in weight training programs.

Are you kidding? If he doesn't get hurt, he's going to put up something like this.... .280, 20 HR, 90 RBI, 110 R, 40 SB ...as a SS. Now, this kid has the #1 pick, and I wouldn't use that on him, but he should go top-10 in every league. Hanley, Reyes, and Rollins are head and shoulders above the rest of the pack at SS. The dropoff from them to everyone else is so huge, which is why they go early in drafts.

To all on the board, when/if you watch him pitch, make sure you have a happy thought about Julio Lugo.

Looks like it wasn't just the pine tar.... 1975 http://caimages.collectors.com/psaimages/6290/01026088/1975%20Topps%20George%20Brett%20PSA%209.jpg 1992 http://i3.iofferphoto.com/img/1100851200/_i/4389604/1.jpg Stupid criteria, stupid conclusion, ftw! BTW, the David Arias picture is from earlier, like the mid-to-late 90's. Here's 2002. http://www.checkoutmycards.com/CardImages/Cards/062/194/05F.jpg Notice the high front foot for his stride. That has totally changed, where he's pretty much set with a small stride for timing. That's a massive change in approach. Perhaps that has something to do with the better results? Nah. It's steroids, just look at the pictures with fabricated dates.

Shocked to see who started this thread. Shocked, I tell you.

Slice it and dice it however you want, but your reason was one bad month. In 5 of 6 he was below the bar. Whether or not I agree or disagree is immaterial. Personally, I think he hits just north of .300 with an OBP under .330. That doesn't mean your stated reason for your conclusion has any value.

Not that batting average is worthy of consideration, but you fully expect him to hit over .300 because he only had one bad month last year, yet he managed to hit under .300 in 5 of the 6. Sound rationalization.

G'day, have a greenie and Go Sox! When I was in the service in Hawaii we cross trained with 2 RAR, and then some time later, I spent 4 days in Darwin. Tiny little town for what shows up as a city on the map.

If Tek hits .250, everyone should be doing cartwheels. His IsoD has been a consistent .100+, and his IsoP has been .150-ish the last few years. That means you are talking about an OPS north of .750, which I'd take in a heartbeat.

ST at least gives us an idea of how one is swinging the bat right now. All I said is that is how I would start the season. In light of new evidence, I'm open to change. This assumes equality. Given the tie-breaker I used, I don't assume they will be equal at the start of the season. Drew gets a decent amount of XBH's, so I'd want him hitting with the table set rather than setting it. That said, I can get on board for his OBP at the top.

If you hadn't brought up the topic from the other thread, the one about your assessment of Lester where you attack my memory, then I'd say it did generate lively debate. This whole thread is a tangent from a previous thread generated by you when you attack the idea of depth in the rotation. Smoltz and Penny are part of that depth in some minds, yet you dismiss them as something other than depth. My comment gets you to address what I feel are inconsistencies in your view of the Schilling signings vs. the Penny and Smoltz signings. That is pertinent to the debate, as a cornerstone to your argument is that Penny and Smoltz don't count as depth. How do you miss this? Do you struggle with reading comprehension? I did admit that Penny wasn't in my original point, which is what made it unclear. Have you or have you not lumped those three together frequently in other posts? Did I or did I not state that for the purposes of discussion I too lumped those three together? I don't know what else you want from me on this, but it's pretty clear that I admit I made a mistake there.

Yeah it's only ST, but Ortiz has a .300+ IsoP and .080+ IsoD, with 5/5 K/BB, and 40% of his hits have gone for extra-bases. Until he looks hurt again, we shouldn't worry about him being hurt, IMO. And, if healthy, he should hit 3rd. Until NoOBP Ellsbury can start getting on base, and/or until Lowrie shows he can't, I'd go with this. Pedroia Lowrie Ortiz Youk Drew Bay Lowell Varitek Ellsbury

You don't think I recapped your position very well? Line for line.... A bit of extrapolation on my part, but if you can't command mediocre stuff, you don't have the stuff to be a big league pitcher. This sounds like a bust, to me. I can't admit I'm wrong? I'm about to. I admit, I wasn't clear in my OP about Schilling. You have consistently lumped the 3 injury signings (Smoltz, Penny, Saito) together as some sort of defective trifecta. I didn't make it clear that when I made my comment about Schilling, who had everything wrong with him that group had, that I considered the group as one for the purposes of discussion. That's my fault for not clarifying that, but I was only following your lead.

That's fine. Like I mentioned upthread, the differences are marginal with a slight favor in statistical performance to Wakefield. There is a case for Sonnanstine. I have no problem if anyone has reasons for prefering him. I will chime in when someone portrays it as something that doesn't even require thought, a foregone conclusion, like a700 did. I have not disputed the future value Sonnanstine holds over Wakefield beyond 2009. I'm trying to stick to the original topic of discussion. The future value, while relevant to a discussion of who you'd prefer to have overall, is not germane to a discussion of the Sox starting pitching depth in 2009.

No, I'm not worked up over it two years later. Here's the thing, I remember s***. I don't want to, but I do. If I read it, it sticks around with me for a while. Unfortunately, most of the stuff I remember is worthless, trivial information, like, for instance, your thoughts on our prospects in spring training. You think it's irrational stating that I'd choose Wakefield in a big game? Look at how you arrive at that conclusion. Postseason stats. Good, let's follow that path. Do you also prefer Sonnanstine over Sabathia? Look at the postseason stats, 2-1 with 4.24 ERA for Sonnanstine, 2-3 with a 7.92 for Sabathia. No brainer, right? Here's the thing, when you use stupid criteria, you get stupid conclusions. Statistically, Sabathia and Wakefield are the superior pitchers, and they are who I choose. I see the difference between Smoltz and Schilling, but my post also included Penny. Penny is analogous to Schilling in that there is a potential for a shoulder issue and he's pre-op. And make no mistake, Schilling had a shoulder issue earlier in the year when he went on the DL to keep him fresh for October. He passed a physical, Penny passed a physical. Apples to apples. When you add a post-op Smoltz to Penny, and the combined committment of resources is in the same ballpark, I think this year's activity is better from a risk mitigation standpoint than last year's. I don't think you can make an argument that recognizes the potential for problems with Schilling's shoulder, which were real, and still prefers that move by itself over the combination this year, not without applying a double standard. Since you don't trust my memory. For the story about Schilling's shoulder: Link

It's not personal, you collossal douche (that is, BTW). It something relevant to our current discussion, no, not the thread topic, but the related tangent, that spilled over from another thread. Now, you are left with 3 options when something spills over. One, you can choose to leave it alone and let it resolve itself out of the thread. Two, you can research and/or ask about it to join the discussion tanget. Three, you can assume you know what the f*** is going on and stick your foot in your mouth. Unfortunately, you picked option 3 and got all butthurt when called out for it. Then you proceded to play thread police and say it had no place here. Well, that wasn't an issue when you couldn't resist chiming in, was it?