ORS

Why would they play Youk, who is an excellent corner infielder at both positions, in LF over Jason Bay?

Can somebody explain the Grant Balfour phenomenon? Career chucker who strikes out a little more than 1 an inning but gives out a free pass for every 2 Ks and twice as many hits. Where does this 18 hits, 60 Ks, 19 BBs in 40 IP come from?

The CHW have put 12 on in 6 and even hit a HR, and they have 2 runs. Maybe it just is the Rays year, they have that kind of s*** happen just about every night.

http://www2.slac.stanford.edu/tip/2005/june17/super-laser-lecture-web.jpg

Quit f***ing dicking around.

What do you mean? Everybody knows you want the tubby, t-shirt slogan guy over a lefty that can rake. To suggest otherwise is blazing a trail.

I think this is an overreaction by Gaston. Marcum usually gives us problems and he's one out from getting out of the inning. Now he's calling on his pen for 5+.

Dude, thanks Marcum, that's a gift like no other. Hitting Cora? You should be sent to the indy leagues for that.

Dude, eat a dick Rios. You've been a do nothing schmuck on my fantasy team all year. What's another few games, cockmuncher?

http://www.laserrentalsinc.com/images/beams_755x450.jpg

Just because they won't bottom out doesn't mean I think they'll be any good. The Mets are staring at a few years to "trying to find the right mix" IMO after this year. And nice try with Church over Milledge. Sure, if you only look at their rates, Church is better, but that better is kind of worthless if it's hurt all the time. Milledge has created 52 runs to Church's 40 this year. Oh, and Milledge is 23 and getting better by the month. He's realizing his talent. Church is 29 and at the peak of his career. Thank you for including this example of why you take your lumps and see what you've got with a kid. The Mets cornholed themselves in this trade in terms of future value, but they appear to be going for it now, so this is OK for them........if Church takes the field. This is the $$ point again. Everyone agrees the larger market clubs should, and will, flex their financial muscle to fill gaps. Stop going off on this tangent, it doesn't address the core disagreement, which is the trading of multiple top-prospects and/or promising young players for an established star. Strawman special. I'm pretty sure I acknoledged that they did it, how could I not while addressing the specifics? I also happened to look at more than what shows up on the transacation page at MLB.com. This move was a good move by the Brewers. They gave up a player with no spot to play. For other teams, it's a different calculus. Stop ignoring this. No. Why do I have to limit my consideration to this year only? If that's all you care about, fine, but don't expect me to agree.

I think the ideal strategy should be to draft and develop well, and where those efforts fall short, supplement the roster with hired guns. This means you will have to take your lumps. Some of those guys who look like they are going to be the next thing will fall on their faces. This is the price you pay to get the benefit of having young, talented players manning roster spots at a value. When / if you happen have an opportunity to trade for an established star, you should do with developing players at a position of redundancy. If that's not possible, then you face a tough decision, and you should trust your evaluation methods. I find it funny that the Brewers' GM is being lauded for acquiring Sabathia. Don't get me wrong, it was good move, but it wasn't a particularly difficult one. LaPorta is a 1B/LF type player. In Milwaukee, he's more blocked than a preganant lady who just ate a wheel of cheese. And, to top it off, LaPorta is a stud prospect, one that would be very difficult for other teams to top. It was a perfect scenario. Good for the Tribe and Brewers, but no awards should come on the heels of that trade.

That's just it, Gom. The mentality of trade 'em all now while they have some value doesn't get you a Kevin Youkilis who you can depend on to man a position for a sizeable window of time. Nope, he's gone two years ago to get an established player. The last part brings this full circle back to my original point. For some guys it's all about where they end up this year, which is fine. But for other's, they don't want to see their team face the future the Mets have facing them. Seriously, think about that team in 2-3 years. They probably won't ever hit the bottom of that division because of their spending power, but I'll be shocked if they are in contention 3 years from now.

Gom, what you are talking about here is keeping the gems from the farm system and supplementing them with the talent on the FA market. Everyone is in favor of that. What you originally posted was about taking 3 or 4 of those gems, and turning them into one superstar player. That muddies it up a bit. Now you are taking an area where the farm has produced and are creating even more holes to have to fill. This isn't doing both, it's robbing from one to pay the other. It's not so cut and dried.

One, I don't know that you can do both. It takes multiple years of drafts, or a uniquely special draft class like the Sox '05 draft, to get the number of players necessary to trade for elite talent. Two, don't trust Jacko and his ramblings about your system. There Sox prospects similar to almost everyone on that list (except Jackson) who you haven't heard about here because they really aren't worth mentioning. Am I saying these guys are garbage? No, but they don't generate much interest outside of Yankee circles are unlikely to get you a return of elite talent, no matter how many of them you throw together. Three, I was in favor of trading for Santana. Although, my caveat, based on what I'd seen to date, was do not trade Buchholz and make sure Lester is in the deal. Glad that didn't happen now. And, given the benefit if hindsight, I'm glad they didn't even if Buchholz was in the deal. Masterson is looking like a good bet to at least be a quality mid-rotation starter or dominant MRP. Lowrie is looking like an all-star at SS, a position this team has had a hard time filling with a very good player since Nomar got hurt.

It isn't a no brainer for exactly the reason you mention. The long term benefit will be greatest for the team who gets the numerous players and youth. What you are going to have a hard time doing is getting guys like Gom and a700 to buy into long term benefit over the immediate gratification of the "now" player. Their view is you worry about the future only once you get there. And then you have the other polar opposite in Jacko, who will assure that the 2012 Yankees will pull off a record breaking wire to wire championship season on the strength of guys they plan to draft in '09 (not to mention the supreme excellence of everyone else they've already drafted).

Bartman, 4 hitless with 40 pitches (23 strikes) thrown last for Pawtucket.

This and the fact that Beckett isn't pitching in Toronto should help our cause up there.

Giambi and Pavano are sure bets to come off their payroll. That's $33M right there. If Pettitte decides to retire, it's $49M. Oh, and they stop paying into revenue sharing with the new stadium opening (teams are exempt while financing a new stadium). Given their struggles this year and the fact that CC and Tex satisfy needs, I'll be shocked if they don't get both.

How does a guy get that strikezone to his first ever MLB batter?

Buchholz est munchen schlong.

It's really looking like Ellsbury's 6 games of goodness wasn't indicative of any long term improvement. Either that, or he just sucks leading off. Time to move him back down into the Varitek locus of the order.

Was that a whole body flinch on the Huff fly-out? Kid appears shot between the ears.

Dead pitcher chucking!