ORS

Manny's money quote during the field celebration pretty much confirmed Scott's role in forcing the trade. Per Manny, "Talk to Scott for getting me to LA".

Cool, I think we've got our first stalker on this site.

The playbook has been very vanilla today. This is not the 'Bama you see in a big game. Last week was. I still think they are the #2 based off what I've seen from them on the year. EDIT: Also, Kentucky can play a little D. While 3 of the teams they've played have been directional schools, they've only allowed 22 pts in 4 games prior to today.

Actually, I think they are terrible defensively. In 5 games this year, they've only given up less than 28 when they played San Jose St. I'm watching, and Claussen is showing improvement. I don't see ridiculous on his horizon, however.

Meh, Stanford really sucks. They have the same "gotta get smart kids" problem ND does, only without the history to attract the best athletes from the pool of smart kids.

I think this opens a can of worms that there's really no sense in opening. One, since Beckett has already been cleared to throw in game 3, it could lead to the perception that it's OK to lose it. Whether or not that is the intended message, the perception counts. Two, supposing they do lose, and the chances are much greater that they will, you then face a game 4 against their ace who pitched well in game 1. Maybe he doesn't make that mistake pitch in game 4 and you are going back to their house for a deciding game. Three, if there is a game 4, you only gain one extra day of rest for Beckett. I think the risk isn't mitigated that much by the one extra day. Finally, supposing he isn't sharp and Beckett loses game 3, remember, he may be fine medically, but he hasn't thrown a game in over a week, you could have him if needed on 2 days rest if there is a game 5. You lose that if he pitches game 4. Don't get complacent. Go for the throat. http://store.collegehypegear.com/shop/pc/catalog/beat-la-again-white-ss_1780_general.jpg

You won't lose multiple 1st or 2nd round picks. Compensatory picks are protected. This is where I think they failed when they changed the rules in the last CBA. Big market teams can still sign multiple FAs and take advantage of the system. Let's use 3 type A players as an example. A team signs 3, they lose their natural 1st, 2nd, and 3rd round picks. They let 3 type A players walk, they gain 2 1st round picks and a 2nd (figure at least 1 team signing their player didn't have a 1st from another move or it was protected, ie top 15) plus 3 1s picks. Let's further assume their draft position is 20 and there were 30 supplemental picks awarded. The first round is 30 picks - they have 2 top 30's. The supplemental round is 30 picks - they have 5 top 60's. The second round is 30 picks - they have 6 top 90's. The 2s round is another 20 picks, the 3rd round is another 20 until they pick, so they gave up 3 top 130's. In exchange for 3 top 130's, they get 6 top 90's. What they should have done is made all picks, natural picks and compesatory picks, subject to the rules of compensation. This would do a much better job of mitigating the loophole. They could still improve their position through the supplemental rounds, but not to the degree that they can now. The way it is now, depending on who becomes available, a big market team can improve both on the field and in the draft at the same time. It runs counter to the intent of the compensation system. Supposing they did change the system to what I posted, let's look at what would have happened with the example. The 3 players signed would have come at the expense of their natural 1st round pick and the 2 1st round picks they were awarded. They would still get the 3 1s picks. They would have 2 in the 2nd, their natural and the awarded one, and they'd keep their 3rd round pick. It's now 6 top 130 picks, with none in the top 30, vs. 6 in the top 90 with 2 in the top 30. Much better, if you ask me.

No, that's a good point. Also, the result of game 1 made two wrongs also. Thus, it's 0-4. From the sound things, ie Beckett's latest BP session, 0-5 is right around the corner. Can we start calling him Melky if he goes 0-5?

Oooops. 0-2.

That'll be a double gut punch if he plays a clean game against them this weekend. The first because he turned it over so regularly for the Broncos when he was on the team. The second because it does mean the defense is that bad. Ouch.

I know they are going to sign a couple of big name FA pitchers. Lowe would be my first choice for them. He has struggled before in this division / league, and as a GB pitcher, it will maximize the exposure of Jeter's defensive deficiency, which is good for Sox fans.

I suspect you may be right, Dojji. And it's unfortunate because Kotsay has had some success against Santana when he's faced him.

You guys really think Tampa is going to win the NFC South? Don't see it. Not with Griese at the helm. He's had 7 turnovers the last 2 games. That's Griese, I can see that, or something similar, continuing. They won both games. I don't see the winning continuing if they are turning it over like that.

Very well, and that difference is all injury, according to you, right? No consideration of the fact that Ian the Suck and Phil Phailure really only missed about 6 starts from their "injuries"? Many of those "rehab" games they pitched in the minors could have happened at the big league level, but they just weren't good enough. Those "missed" starts were by choice, and for good reason.

No ka oi! The Flyin' Hawaiian strikes again.

Squeezed. Rattled. And pressing.

He's getting worked by Myers....and he walks him. Rollins can get the state of Wisconsin to achieve maximum sphincter pressure here.

Here come the Phighting Phils. Does CC get tagged as an October flop if he fails again here, even if he's throwing his 3rd consecutive start on 3 days rest?

Yes reading is fundamental. It's clear, if you read, I'm poking holes in your notion of "depth" going into the year. If I contend you never had it to begin with, I don't have to concede you lost it before injury called on your system. Get it?

Also, I'm very skeptical the Yankees only got 111 starts from their arbitrary 6 (obviously included to mitigate the impact of the loss of Schilling for the entire season) due to injury. Hughes and Kennedy sucked. That has to count for something. They did combine for 18 starts in the minors. You usually only need 3 on a rehab, so cut the extra 23 in half, at least.

Right, and the reason you got hit harder is that you didn't have any depth. Despite your constant frothing about how stacked the Yankees were in the minors and how the Sox would be in trouble if Schilling didn't pitch. Remember these preseason nuggets of wisdom, Jack?

If Scott Boras went sky diving one weekend and the wind blew him into power lines, electrocuting him to death. I'd think, "Man, what a shame, those utility workers probably had to leave their day off with their families to go clean up that mess". Dead serious. There are some people the world would be a better place without. Boras and his ilk are at the top of that list. No honor, no integrity, no ethics, no thanks.