a700hitter

Acquisition of a big star can only be evaluated in hindsight, but failed acquisitions like Hanley, Pablo, and Porcello are given a pass by you if you agreed with the strategy when the deals were made? Am I getting you wrong on this? i never said that the two were mutually exclusive. In fact, I acknowledged that there are different strokes for different folks. Speaking only for myself, I never worry about billionaire's money. But that is just me. I figure that they know how to look after their money without my help or advice. i also never worry about the Red Sox being financially strapped. If they blow their budget for a couple of years, they have the financial strength to make it through the worst contracts. What would be the worst-- a 5 year dog of a contrac? That is not going to bankrupt them. It might force them into luxury tax territory, but they are not going to be forced to adopt an austerity budget. The Red Sox can whether a few years of bad contracts and still be successful. They are not the Kansas City Royals. So, no I don't worry about that, but you are free to worry about it. It is your right.

Agreed, but any trade for a top pitcher would cost one of those three. If the FO, will not part with either Bogaerts or Betts, we can rule out getting Harvey, because the Mets are set at catcher for the future with d'Arnaud and Plawecki.

People who think that we can get Sonny Gray or Matt Harvey or Strasburg without giving up Betts, Bogaerts or Swihart are not being realistic. If we don't go the FA route, people will have to stomach losing one of those three guys.

Middle infielder potential? It's hard to gauge his mobility in those slippers.

Last place is just first place upside down.

Hey, SFF good to see you. Did you get to Fenway this season?

I think you are borrowing trouble. If he is performing well in the first two years, will you be actively worried about the back end of his contract? I like to live in the moment when it come to sports. That is just me. I am not criticizing you for worrying about the future. Different strokes. I save my worries for my real life. Baseball is fun for me, and if the idiot owners want to throw around their money like it is Monopoly money, that is their business and their worries. The financial aspect of sports is so far out of hand that average people just can't relate to it. I am not worried about the Red Sox running out of money or going out of business. They will find a way to be very profitable, and they have a huge advantages and resources compared to other franchises, so I am not worried about them crippling the team with bad contracts. And really, how much worse could they do than 3 last place finishes.

I enjoyed the heck out of that World Championship. It was a dream come true to be at game 6 (even better that it was free), but I do shudder at the last place finishes.

i knew you would appreciate the humor.

Two ******* posts in a row. Go for three and win a prize. Lol!

So did you shudder at Pedro's contract or not? You are talking out of both sides of your mouth. If you would sign the guy and like having him on the team, what are you shuddering about. Just enjoy getting a great player to watch. I just don't get the shuddering thing. It just seems fatalistic to me. Not very optimistic.

Three last place finishes in four years is a golden shower.

I love the team and the players, but the GM did a terrible job and suffered the consequences. Good luck to him getting a GM job in the future. He didn't exactly cover himself in glory. It is very unusual for the Red Sox to fire its GM. Duke got fired as part of a regime change. Other than ownership changes, I can't remember when the Red Sox fired its GM. Criticism of the GM is not criticism of the team in my view.

If Papi gets 500-600 PAs this year, doesn't he vest for another year? I wouldn't be surprised if he plays 2 more years. If he does, then we signed HanRam for 4 years to take over DH in the last year of his contract. That is not a wise move in my opinion if that was the strategy.

Talk about evading an answer! If you shudder at all long term contracts, and since you didn't deny that Pedro's and Manny's contracts made you shudder, I would have to conclude that those contracts also made you shudder. If that is the case, fair enough. From day one of those acquisitions, I enjoyed every minute of watching those guys play, and I am glad that Duke had the balls to pull the trigger on those deals.

If he stinks from day one without being injured or because he didn't want to play in Boston or for some other reason that should have been discovered during due diligence, that would be a true enigma, and no one would be to blame. And the chances of that are less than one tenth of one percent (.001)

So you shuddered at the 8 year contract for Manny Ramirez and the 6 year contract for Pedro?

He will only stink if he is injured or he just doesn't want to play in Boston. The FO needs to do it it's due diligence on those issues. If he is healthy, he is not going to stink. That is not going to happen. He will perform in the early years, but age and wear and tear might result in underperformance in the later years of the contract. That would not be unexpected.

A funny prick. You get me.

Let's go Mets! In the ALCS, I like Toronto.

What price for Price wouldn't make you shudder?

It's your wacky pessimistic hypothetical. You tell us how you will react. The only thing that I am somewhat sure of is that I will be happy if they sign Price.

Wow, what a pessimist!

I know that McClain was a thief, but I thought he went to jail for looting a pension fund. I didn't know that he ran a bookie operation while still playing.

Second guessing is the right and province of the fan. We can't be fired. Speaking for myself, if we get a couple or 3 years of good performance from a player, I am good with that even if they stink at the end of their contract, but if we sign a guy for big bucks who is a bust on day 1, I will blame the FO.