ORS

O RLY? For shits and giggles.... Then, the original post that I responded to..... What now?

No, no, no. I have read what you said, I got your idea of using projections for the 2010 roster, and I called BS, because that's what it was. Then I showed you how a tradeoff analysis should be done. I'm not twisting anything, I am directly refuting your analysis without creating a strawman. You just don't like it because you look foolish with what you are saying. EDIT: And "similar" is a laugh. They should be significantly better, but you'll never say that because their uniform contains red socks and not blue pinstripes.

Not only that, but look closer at what he's doing in that 2nd post. He's throwing defensive projections in to support his analysis of how they will compare "on paper" to last year's offense. He's throwing paint against the wall and trying to sell it as art.

I read what you said about using projections for the players that lost time in 2010, and I, appropriately, called it fantasy. It's why I posted what they actually got from each position. It's why you are absolutely right that Martinez is miles better than Saltalamacchia at this point offensively, but since Martinez didn't catch every game (there was a bunch of Kevin Cash last year), your comparison is weak because it makes the assumption that the platoon for 2011 has to match Martinez, and Martinez only. This is lazy analysis on your part. From the catcher they got a .793 OPS last year, due in large part to Martinez. Saltalamacchia projects for a mid-.700 OPS this year. That's not a ton. Once 2010 is on the books, it doesn't matter what they could have been on paper. They were #2 in runs scored last year. Number 2. They look to be significantly better at several positions across the diamond. They are not weaker offensively than they were last year. Period.

Unintentional pun, but now that you mention it, it does work.

Joe Mauer, Brian McCann, Matt Wieters, Buster Posey......all in the same generation, and they can catch. Let's lighten up on the Montero hyperbole. Very good prospect, yes, excellent even. Generational, ie once every 20/30 years, is a bit much.

I had been asleep for 3 hours at the time of this post. Gotta hit the bed early if I want to go to the gym before work....because I get to work at 6:30. I'm out of bed by 4:00 am every day. Like others, love the addition, don't love the contract. I'm skeptical he can be a $20M player at the back end of it, but the next 4 years aren't as worrisome, and they have what looks like a very good core (both in the field and on the mound) during that time. They've stacked their chips in what looks like a 5 year window. Exciting times. To all, just don't be surprised if there's another bridge year at the end of that window.

I agree 100% with this. If he's available for a token prospect, even if it's at full freight, they should get him.

Not an issue, IMO. They'll get two supplemental 1st rounders from VMart and Beltre + two supplemental round picks. Losing their #24 pick is not a big deal. Now, getting him to accept a deal to keep setting up might be an issue. He's probably going to get offers to close. EDIT: I realize Beltre may turn into a 2nd round pick, but I'm still good with it.

I think you guys are about a wash at OL, but I like y228's defensive front 7 and RB corps better than YH213's, so I think the running game goes to y228. Yes, Wilfork is an immovable object in the middle, but I think Harrison and Ware are being underrated against the run in that analysis. Their speed, which is what makes them great pass rushers, also allows them to shut down outside running, which you won't want to do with the RB group anyway, and collapse on between the tackle runs. Really, though, it's all about Shonn Greene vs Ahmad Bradshaw, IMO. Bradshaw runs harder between the tackles than any smallish guy I've seen in quite some time. That he hasn't been a feature back is more a function of Brandon Jacobs than it is of his talent.

IIRC, Jacko's point last year was that his WHIP was not indicative of his ERA and that it (ERA) go up, without even looking at the specific rates (K/9, BB/9, etc.) and BABIP. In fact, I don't recall BABIP being in the conversation. The people that argued with him said, yes, it's true that the WHIP doesn't support the ERA, but rather than the ERA going up, the WHIP could come down. Which it did. Now it appears he's shifting gears, admittedly to a valid point, because his original prediction, the only one we'll ever get BTW - ie that a Sox player will get worse (I know, shocking isn't it?), was wrong. So in order to maintain the only point he'll ever make, again - that a Sox player will get worse, he's fishing for another reason. Personally, none of us know what's going to happen. You can't predict BABIP. And his rates were all over the board in different parts of the season last year. Whatever happens, happens, but there's equal room to argue either side, although none of it will be overwhelmingly convincing for this simple reason, he hasn't played in the bigs long enough to give you any idea of what to consistently expect from him.

I thought his agent was Boras. It's not?

I'm saying it's made up, like the 6-year deal Damon had on the table was back in '05. It's phony, and this is a common Boras tactic.

What does that have to do with what I posted?

If this is what you got from what I posted, then the first sentence of the next quote is some good advice for you to follow. There's no deciphering. This isn't a mixed message we are getting. Nothing is lost in translation of your Brooklynese. We get what you are saying. What you are saying is following a pattern. We are commenting on the pattern. I know it's not enforceable. That's a risk. Boggs and Gonzalez could go back on their word, or the Sox could. For either side that is something that I think they'd be foolish to do, and they know it. They'd lose all credibility in future negotiations. If this is truly a move for LT considerations, whether he comes out of the gate hot or not is immaterial, the deal will get announced shortly after opening day.

Dude, it's Heyman. Now, I'm not in the "don't believe anything Heyman says" boat, but he is widely acknowledged as Boras's mouthpiece at this time of year. Color me skeptical of this 7-year deal that "isn't the Yankees". This is Boras 101, he's trying to get them to jump, IMO.

Nice try, but not true. You've made some responses in the not too distant past that suggest people are ridiculous for assigning any agenda other than wanting to win to you. However, think about that. Multiple posters get the same vibe from your posts. I'm explaing where that vibe is coming from, at least from my perspective. If it's a couple of people, you might have a point, but if many tell you that you are coming off a certain way, it's probably because you are. And, again, the parameters of the deal are set according to the reports. I'm not sure how much "upper hand" there can be moving forward if that is true.

Priceless. You make some strong statements about the impact of losing Moss, the opposite happens, and you call "fluke"? "Mea culpa", that's the post you were looking for.

We know, you've been pimping it pretty hard today.

Not to me. Youkilis in LF has little appeal to me, not only because he looked pretty lost out there before, but also because I don't know how he'd hold up out there. And while I think Beltre can continue to play well in Fenway, I'd have no interest in seeing if it can hold up for 5 years. It's a total impulse move for 2011 with little consideration of the years beyond.

He's an extra piece, though, and not a must have player. I think they'll get better offers at the deadline from a contender with needs.