a700hitter

I am curious. Did anyone buy any tickets today? Edit: the GamePax are such ********. 4 of the 12 GamePax have an Astro game. f*** them.

The other possibility is that they have just done a s***** job. Blaming the fans is ridiculous. They don't run the team ans they have no say.

Finishing last two years in a row carries risks for the franchise.

The secondary market for tickets evaporated after April. I am not talking about looking to make a profit, just to recoup cost. Luckily, I scored early on selling some tickets to Yankee games at a huge markup to defray most of my losses. Screw the Yankee fans. For the most part, I had trouble giving away the tix. I don't buy tix to resell, but the Sox put you in the position with the stupid GamePax-- 1 Yankee game, 1 weekend game and 2 weekday games against schlubs. Jung, me and others are notr going to leave ourselves at the mercy of a dead secondary market this year, so the primary market will take the hit.

Let's hope that it is not a dead cat bounce.

You got that right. They should redistribute some of his money to us. They should probably redistribute some of his meaningless saves. It's not fair that he has so many.

And this will prove that Papelbon is not a good closer? Again, what argument are you trying to make. You are insisting to an answer to a question that you posed on an essentially irrelevant point. What would an answer to this question prove about Papelbon in any way? I think that you have been jerking yourself around.

Seriously, are you trying to prove that Papelbon is not good because he has consistently high save totals?:dunno: I am not getting the point of your argument. Saves may not be determinative of whether a closer is a good pitcher, but a consistently high save total for 7 straight years doesn't prove that he is not a good pitcher. If anything, the fact of the consistency of his results would lead a reasonable person to think it is an indicator (among others) that he is pretty good and not just lucky for 7 straight years. As for agreeing with me, if you were a little smarter, you would agree with me more often. Check that, if you were a lot smarter...

I am underwhelmed by the talent pool of our minor league pitching. Only Barnes intrigues me, and he has to prove that he can dominate at AA before I get excited about him. He'll be turning 23 this June, so his development has not exactly been on a super fast track. The other 2 guys don't spark my interest. DeLarosa is probably a bullpen guy. Webster is probably little better than Zach Stewart. The guy gives up way too many hits in the minors. I don't see him making it with us at all.

BTW, I said 50 years, not 60 years. If you are going to pick nits, at least be accurate when you do so.

So, you were arguing to just to argue. I wasn't getting defensive, just pointing out your very ineffective technique of arguing irrelevancies and picking nits. I was just trying to help you communicate better. I am sorry if you took it the wrong way.

Really lousy answer. I didn't ask you what a Bridge Year is. I asked what the bridge will look like. Who are all the young talented guys that we are waiting for and when will they arrive? I am extremely interested in any young pitchers who can hold down a rotation spot in 2014. What kind of team will the Sox be in this bridge year? At least you acknowledge that some moves need to be made in a bridge year, or do you want to back away from that? By team friendly, short term deals do you mean moves like the ones made last year for Aaron Cook, Ohlendorf and Carlos Silva?

Not at all. Interest in the team is very low right now. Did you check in on game threads in late August and September. Even the looney Sox fans weren't interested. Whether it is the lowest interest in 50, 40, 30 or 10 years is really irrelevant. What is relevant is that interest in the Sox is not high right now and tickets go on sale tomorrow. It will be interesting to see how the sales do? You like to argue irrelevant non-foundational statements, and I have no interest in finding data to support something irrelevant. BTW, don't you live in Seattle or some other far away place? So, how could you gauge interest in the team in Boston? It's low. No one talks about them and no one has anything good to say about them. It's been a really long time where I have seen such disinterest in the team. I think it will be reflected in the advanced ticket sales until they make some moves. As for making things up, I read your "Bridge Year" post. What do you have to support that claim-- any stories, FO interviews or statements, or is it just your gut feeling based on nothing but your own projected feelings? ;)At least my opinion is based on my interaction with other Boston fans (friends, family and co-workers) in Boston and other observations during my frequent travels to Boston.

What kind of Bridge are we talking about-- a last place bridge, and .500 bridge? Talk of a Bridge Year causes me a problem, because without saying more, we don't know where the bridge is headed or the timetable for completion. At this point, it is just a term to provide a convenient excuse for failure in the off season and the regular season. If this will be a bridge year because the FO will eschew overpriced veterans in favor of building a young core for the future, most people could understand and support that. That would probably also involve sending some current veterans away in trades for prospects. Most people could probably support that too. A lot of people liked the Lester for Myers idea. However, we are not seeing any building for the short term or the long term. We are seeing a lot of nothing. That doesn't help today or the future. If I am going to believe this is a bridge year, I have got to see some activity, some building towards that purpose. Doing nothing would not be a bridge year. It would be a throw away year.

It's amazing how you always seize on irrelevant portions of a statement or argument.

A 46 year low?

Tickets go on sale tomorrow at 10 am. The interest in the team is at a 50 year low. The ticket lines should be very short.

Good relievers can get plenty of saves on lousy teams. Look at the number of saves accumulated by Joakim Soria for lousy Royal teams. Edit: I don't see the correlation to being on a winning team.

Saves are not his only consistent number. Plus, he got 38 save for an 81-81 third place team from a terrible division in 2012.

I don't think he has made as much as KRod, and he is much better than KRod.

He hasn't gotten to Mo money yet.

Papelbon was as consistent and reliable a reliever as anyone in the game not named Rivera. He's never had an arm issue after 2006. The guy is a stud closer and the Phillies paid the price for a stud. Last year, we had a psycho and a lame fill Paps spot, and as some of us predicted the end of games were like bad horror movies.

If Bailey stays healthy, there should be enough arms to get by provided the starters can stretch out beyond 5 innings. Deep innings from your starters can cover up a pen's weakness and keep the reliable arms fresh.

We should have offered them Zach Stewart.