a700hitter

Sign JD. Put him in LF and move Benintendi to RF and trade Bradley for Machado. That would be a potent offense.

Nothing is a given, but it is not realistic. Bogaerts has never outperformed Machado offensively. Last season, the batting WAR was 3.5 for Machado and 2.2 for Bogey.

A bad year from Machado blows away a good year from Bogaerts. It is not impossible that Bogaerts would have a better season than Machado, but it is extremely unlikely and unrealistic. And I am not convinced that there is very much potential for increased performance with our current crew. We have hole at 2B for the first 2 months of the season. That is a huge problem. Vasquez is likely to take a step back. I would expect a slight step back from Moreland, slight improvements from Bogaerts and Betts. I expect about the same performance from Bradley. The wild cards are Devers and Benintendi. Are these guys ready to break out, or has the league adjusted to them? I am not seeing enough room for improvement as a squad. The Yankees added a wrecking ball and they were already better than our offense.

I was just basing my opinion based on skills.

It has been reported that the Dodgers offered the Red Sox Puig for Bradley and the Red Sox declined. IMO, that is a close call.

Everyone wants a good deal. If all sides are competently represented there is equilibrium and a true market is established.

Agents are a necessary evil. Otherwise, the players would be completely unarmed in negotiations. They are barely capable of making their own travel plans. Most cannot deal with financial issues.

When the exchange extends beyond a few posts, people (me included) need to be reminded of our policy.

it is possible that Bogaerts has a better 2018 than Machado, but it is extremely unlikely. He is not closed to being as skilled a hitter as Machado. The bat speed is just not there. As for your position that our offense is fine with the current crew, I think you are wrong. If there are no changes to this lineup, it will continue to suffer from the same fits of inconsistency that plagued it last year.

In the bullpen, his deficiencies would not have been as exposed. He was not capable of going through a lineup a second time. His career probably would have fallen apart, but it might have taken longer.

And there is a lot of what I would consider misguided indoctrination in that statement, but just a reminder that politics is verboten here. There are many thousands of forums to engage in political nonsense. Take it elsewhere.

Even communist states have capitalism. In communist states, capitalism happens on the black market. Nations in European Union are heavily socialist.

Ethical owners? Maybe you made the reference in your reply or you projected it. I didn’t see that reference from anyone.

Thanks Ben. Bobby V knew that the kid didn’t have the makeup to be a starter. Ben and Bard wanted it. I remember reading early on in Spring Training that Bobby V asked the kid if he was sure that he wanted to pursue starting after a couple of rocky outings. To me, Bobby knew that the kid didn’t have it and he was looking to give him a way out. Bard was stubborn and didn’t know his own limitations and the wheels fell off in an ugly train wreck.

Is anyone taking up the argument that owners are ethical? I must have missed that part of the thread.

There are negatives to contingency fee arrangements, so there is a lot of disclosure that is required.

The only thing that keeps an agent from screwing a client is that the agent's compensation is directly tied to the player's compensation, so they always have a self interest in maxing out a player's compensation.

Are we arguing that a lawyer is bound to present evidence that is adverse to his client? That simply is untrue. The attorney's first and foremost duty is to zealously represent his client. An attorney who presents evidence adverse to the interests of his client would quickly find himself in all sorts of ethical trouble with his local bar association. BTW, the ABA has nothing to do with any of this. An attorney presents evidence contrary to the interests of his client only when compelled to do so by a court -- this can be in many forms including pre-trial discovery. An attorney cannot lie about the existence of evidence or suborn perjury. There are ethical rules as to what an attorney must do if he realizes that his client is testifying untruthfully, which is why a defense attorney will almost never ask his client is he committed the crime. The one time when an attorney must voluntarily disclose evidence that is adverse to his client's interests is in a criminal case -- a prosecutor must voluntarily disclose all exculpatory evidence. As for sports agents and their ethics, please don't make me laugh. They are the scum that scum scrapes off its shoes. If people think they are not leaking information regarding the details of existing bids, you are kidding yourself.

LOL!!! Their marketing department could use your fertile mind.

I disagree.

The Red Sox will find revenue streams. I don't doubt that.

There are TV ratings to consider. It is my understanding that those have not been good in the last few years. That translates into big bucks.

It has average dimensions in CF and LF. Nothing especially deep. LFC at 390 is the one tough spot, but that tapers down drastically as you move toward LF.

That should do it.

Got it.