a700hitter

Could've had Abreu in the 5 hole if Theo had a pair of balls.

Kendrick with the error.

It's an excellent move by the Yankees, and if our FO had a pair of balls they would have done it. Abreu would've been the #5 Hitter we need and Lidle would have filled the empty rotation spot.

They are beginning to print playoff tickets

Except when he is facing one of our pitchers with runners in scoring position.

I agree. The Skankees pick up Abreu and Lidle for some s*** prospects without touching their major league roster, and the Red Sox are considering sending of the #2 hitter who has been doing a great job of getting on for the big boys.

You came dangerously close to telling me what I was thinking, but you made a last second save with "probably." Laziness was a possibility, but the Guardians did not think so highly of him, because they shipped his ass off. I should get some credit for saying that I didn't think they should keep that lineup, because they haven't.

If you want to argue with me about the merits of batting Perez 5th in the Guardians lineup, I am fine with that, because i thought that was a watering down of their lineup. However, you take that as me saying the Guardians offense sucks. That's a mischaracterization and a misrepresentation. You are not grasping the distinction. If you don't like me saying that you are misrepresenting my positions, then stop misrepresenting my positions. Don't tell me what you think I am saying, and argue with me when I tell you that is not my position. I think I am in a better position to know what I am thinking.

Thank you for making my point. I didn't like that day's particuilar lineup, and I believe I said that if they continued to bat Michaels #2 and Perez #5 that they would not finish second in runs scored. I still don't like that lineup. BTW when was the last time that Cleveland fielded that lineup? Maybe I was right. A hint: In a debate, the best thing to do is make your strongest and best argument and support your argument with facts. Losing debaters and dirty politicians resort to misrepresenting other people's positions and insisting that they know what the speaker (poster) meant. Any team with Hafner, Perhalta, Sizemore, Belliard and Victor Martinez is not weak, and Eduardo Perez should not be cracking the top 5 on that team. That would water down the lineup.

...and he is doing it for a 3rd straight year. He also made the All Star team Thanks for all the research, but what is your point? Are Lowe and Pedro an inseparable dance team. For the last time, Pedro should have been a priority. Let's judge him on his own record, and not water it down with someone else's stats. Two All Star teams and we are still hearing the twilight of his career justification. You answered your own question, not mine. I asked how many Red Sox other than Manny and Ortiz have more homers than Damon. Where did I ask about 10 or more Homers. That's okay. If you don't like the answer to a question answer a different question. What is your point about RBI's. Damon is a leadoff hitter who gets paid to score runs not drive them in. You can't evaluate a trade for prospects for at least 5 years. It's not a fair perspective to judge it earlier. For example, Boddicker for Schilling looked pretty good for the first 3 or 4 years, but it doesn't look quite as lopsided now. I am sure we will soon be able to add the Abreu trade to the list.

Just ever so slightly.

Again a misrepresentation. I never think any of these guys suck. Sometimes I don't think a guy will make it, but I don't form any opinion until I see them play. Sometimes I am wrong. As for the Cleveland Guardians offense, you are once again misrepresenting my position. I thought that on a particular day Unit faced a watered down Indian lineup. That's much different than an opinion that the Guardians' offense sucks.

The Braves GM would be a fool not to do it. Yes you are misrepresenting my position. Murphy is going nowhere. He's stuck behind Crisp and Ellsbury. He is prototypical trade bait. Pedroia reminds me of Mike Gallego more than Miguel Tejada, so I'd part with him. The only reason that I would offer both MDC and Hansen is because the Braves seem determined not to move Smotlz, and I think he is a difference maker. If I could keep one of them, I'd prefer to keep Hansen who is two years younger and has no history of arm woes. This again is the twighlight of thier careers agument. The problem with Bernie isn't his contract. The problem was that the Yankees had no successsion plan for CF until they signed Damon. The Sox would have had Ellsbury waiting in the wings. They also would have had Papelbon ready to take the mantle from Pedro in Pedro's 2nd or 3rd year. Don't look now, but the two kids are not doing that great yet. I stress yet. I don't expect them to be Goose gossage and Eckersley this year, so we will continue to have 2006 bullpen problems unless Foulke can return to form. BTW: I will die laughing if Theo pulls off a trade and moves a couple of prospects.

CrespoBlows is a TalkSox star. I am adamantly opposed to moving him for prospects. We should take nothing less than an impact Starting Pitcher. If none is available, our financial structure can continue to support both CrespoBlows and 700. Afterall, how many new posters will ever get to their level? A very small percentage. Although CrespoBlows is clearly in the twighlight of a great posting career, I think there is a lot left in the tank.

I got a question, who has advocated such a thing? He or she should be flogged. What is it with you, if someone disagrees with you and the FO you feel compelled to address their arguments by misrepresenting their positions with absurdly extreme characterizations?

So, you are admitting that the Mets do a better job of balancing prospects with established stars? BTW: Nady was not from the Met system. He came in a trade. I know I am winning the argument when people resort to misrepresenting my position. Where have I advocated dismantling the franchise? Read my earlier posts. I have been critical that the FO has let our stars walk away. I have maintained that we could keep our core stars and built the farm simultaneously. If that is advocating any sort of dismantling, please explain. If there has been any dismantling it has been the FO that let the foundation of the 2004 team walk away for nothing. Where have I advocated trading our brightest prospects for rentals? Again, you are misrepresenting my position. While I do advocate trading some prospects to fill the holes created by the FO's moves in letting Pedro go and trading Arroyo, I would hope that they would be smart enough to keep the best prospects. It's their job to figure out who will make it and who will not.

I would have preferred to keep Lowe, but as i have stated in prior posts my priority would have been Pedro. Keeping or losing Pedro should be addressed on it own merits. It bogus to tie his stats to Lowe's as a justification that the FO made the right decision about Pedro. If you want to play that game though: 2006: Wells and Clement 5 wins Pedro and Lowe 16 wins

That would suck.

Don't count on Dotel. I told you that months ago when you though he would be back in June.

The Yankees get an All Star outfielder with a .450 OBP, and the Red Sox back up plan is a minor leaguer, Pedroia.

...and this means that the percentage of draft picks that become HOF ers is greater than I think? You need to take a course in logic. Yes, Damon and Pedro are in the twighlight of their careers. Pedro has managed to make the All Star team in his first two years with the Mets and Damon already has 13 HRs with the Yankees befores August. How many guy do we have with more that are not named manny and Ortiz?

I am sorry that you cannot follow the math, but some teams do a better job of this than the Red Sox. How is it that the Mets have taken our Pedro and signed LoDuca, Beltran, Glavine, and DelGado, but their payroll is $19 million less than the Red Sox. Are they using smoke and mirrors? http://www.onestopbaseball.com/TeamPayroll.asp I have heard that they are in the twilight of their great careers. BTW Damon hit 2 HRs today and they were bombs. Just like the whining owners, you are ignoring the fact that the owners are making more money than ever before. Keep sticking your head in the sand. What's nonsensical about your statement is the following. I'll number the steps so you don't forget the sequence of events and you can see the break in your logic: 1. I have been advocating trading some of our prospects to plug the holes created by the FO. 2. You responded that it was no longer the 70's and prospects were too valuable. 3. I used the Cone and MG Wire trades for prospects in the mid to late 90's as examples that it is still doen successfully. 4. You responded that those were salary dumps. How does your assertion in #4 make the acquisitions any less successful for the Yankees and the Cardinals? How is your assertion relevant to and how does it refute my argument in #1 that we should be looking for those deals to plug our holes? Please explain or I stand by my assertion that your statement about salary dumps is nonsense in the context of our discussion. I am an attorney for a Fortune 100 Company, and I am directly responsible for benefit plans that are funded with more than $13 billion dollars in assets. Gee, that's more than the FMV of the Yankees and Red Sox combined. When you get your MBA and your law degree and a masters is tax law from a top Law School send me your resume. You can't be seriously comparing the Red Sox franchise to Tampa Bay. That's your second completely nonsensical remarks.

Please tell me what percentage of draft picks eventually have even a 5 year mediocre career in the Major leagues. What percentage become all-stars? and what percentage become Hall of Famers? I'll tell you that the answer to the last one is 0% in many draft years. There is a reason that stars make big $. It is because an incredibly small percentage of players become stars. You are not dealing with reality. The FO let go of a Hall of Famer and replaced him with a FA (Cement head) that couldn't carry Derek lowe's jock, and some lottery tickets. Good deal. Let me know when I can make my Cooperstown reservations to see any of them inducted.

Abreu killed us when we last faced him.

I was not backtracking. I would have preferred to keep Lowe. It was you who said if we kept Pedro and Lowe there would be no Wells. I was just acknowledging that at least Wells would be a reasonable replacement for Lowe for 1 or 2 years. I was partially agreeing with you. Thank goodness I didn't totally agree with you, because you definitely would not allow that degree of backtracking. Coco was never Damon's equal, and only people with Crystal Balls like yourself and Theo know that he will eventually be as good as Damon, but how long will that take-- 3 or 4 years? Gee, that'll be just about the time Coco's contract is up and he'll walk. I have no idea what the future will bring, and neither do you, smart alek. That's my point exactly. You have no idea what any of these prospects will become, but we know what we lost. While I have no idea about the future, I do know that the FO sacrificed success in 2005 and they are in the process of sacrificing success in 2006.