a700hitter

I read that the only FS pitcher to sign a $100+ million deal after January 1st is Tanaka. Both Shields and Scherzer are in unchartered territory.

it will probably take him a few weeks before the genius realizes that he can't pencil in a DH.

They should also be forced to live in an oppressive shithole like Cuba to gain some perspective.

If they want to be pricks for making millions playing baseball in a country where you can drive a car built after 1957, they are free to go back and live in a shithole of oppression.

Now that the Tigers and every big market team has formally or informally withdrawn from the Sherzer Sweepstakes, I guess that he will have to catch on with an Independent League or Japan.

Agreed. He thinks he is a genius.

I have outlived some of my bosses in my current job, which is not a dream job. Theo had youth on his side.

He's still a twit for asking out of his contract to leave his dream job for his favorite team. I can't even think of an analogy to describe it. He's a fool in my book. I don't care what he does in Chicago.

You can also reuse it every September to beat yourself on the head when they get eliminated from playoff contention and you realize that you will be spending another winter in Milwaukee.

He's a twit. He walked away from his dream job for his favorite team.

I know that Theo had a cult-like following, but he did some really wierd things in his tenure. Do you remember that he rented an entire hotel to try to nail down signing Jose Contreras and when he failed to sign him, he allegedly through chairs around. Then there was the hissy fit. Even after he left he acted inappropriately by asking to use his old office. If someone leaves your organizatio for a competitor, the former employer shouldn't let you on the premises unless you are accompanied at all times by an employee.

I do think the FO has to react to the bottom line and last place finishes are very damaging for a team that charges premium prices. I can't jump to blaming the casual fans for signings like Carl Crawford. At the time of the signing, Crawford was piling up hits at a faster rate than Jeter did at the same stage. He was also piling up stolen bases. He was a very good player who turned into a dog. The big problem with that signing is that they paid $20+ million more than the next closest reported offer. The fans didn't force them to negotiate like idiots. I don't believe in rationalizing bad move by blaming the fan base that made the franchise a premier sports franchise.

Lol! My wife was also a history major and a teacher. She's no scared rabbit either. I was just tweaking the Theo groupies.

btw It sounds like Theo acted like a scared rabbit -- typical behavior of History Majors.

The next time I go to a Sox game I will tell you where to find me, and I will buy you a drink. Hopefully, we will be enjoying a good team.

It just means that they couldn't sell the other guy on the wrong guy so we could keep the right guy. There is nothing defensible about being out-negotiated by the other guy. Keeping Lars and losing Rizzo adds up as a negative. I'm not lamenting. I'm just evaluating instead of rationalizing.

Maybe we let the wrong FO guy go. Is that your point? Either way, the proof of the pudding is in the eating, and keeping Lars while trading Rizzo has been some bad pudding.

Okay okay, but you really just push your own buttons. You take every criticism of the FO moves too personally. Admitting that they have made mistakes is not a condemantaion of them and it doesn't in any way reflect on you. We discuss the Red Sox every day here mostly in a cordial and civil manner. None of those FO guys would discuss anything with either one of us or have a drink with us, so they are not worth the loyalty of either of us.

At one point Lars was the Red Soz #1 rated prospect (2009) and he was in the top 10 a couple of years. Rizzo was never higher than the Sox #7 prospect.

Sure I can. It's their decision and it is their performance that gets evaluated-- not my opinion. If I like a player and he stinks, I don't try to tell people how good he is because I liked him. I say that I was wrong about the guy. You have used the strawman argument here. You have made the following assumptions: that Rizzo would have struggled as much in Fenway as he did at Petco and in the Cubs pathetic lineup and that I would have complained about him. You have used those hypothetical assumptions to conclude that I have no right to complain about getting rid of Rizzo. Assume that I grant you your strawman hypotheticals and admit that as a complainer and critic of prospects (not true by the way) that I never have the right to criticize the FO for trading prospects. Assuming that all of your faulty premises, hypotheticals and other mullarkey that you have splattered in this thread are right, none of it disproves the fact that they made the wrong move keeping Lars and having him higher on their list than they did Rizzo. It doesn't matter what you think my agenda is (and you are wrong about that too), they botched it by keeping the wrong first baseman.

My recollection is that Lars was the more highly rated prospect, so why would they turn him down.

We would have demolished the Philly staff with the possible exception of Hamels. Those guys stunk.

Carlos Gomez is 6'3" and 220 lbs. Bradley is about 5'9". He will never develop the power that Gomez has. Gomez has more offensive tools -- power and great speed and base stealing ability.

I am not judging the trade. I am judging their ability to judge and develop their own talent. They traded the best ballplayer that has come through their system in recent years at a time when other teams were drooling over Lars. You are arguing in circles. First, you said that that Rizzo would have been booed out of town. When it was pointed out, that Fenway fans don't ride their players too hard you shifted to saying that the fans can't complain about trading a prospect thjat took 3 years to develop when they bash all of the prospects anyway. When it was pointed out that we could complain about trading the wrong prospects your response is that we wanted AGon and you should judge the trade by who we got. You are spinning so fast that I am getting dizzy. Who we got in that trade is irrelelvant to the criticism that I am leveling at them. BTW, AGon was such a great catch that we didn't even keep him for 2 seasons. The criticism is that the Red Sox coveted Lars more than they did Rizzo and that was a mistake. It would have worked out much better if they had traded Lars instead if Rizzo for AGon.

It is their job to know who the duds are. You keep the studs and trade the duds. It's like"buy low sell high " in investing. That's what the good ones get paid to do. Sure it is difficult, but if your money is on the line, you don't want to hear excuses. AGon is not even part of the discussion. The FO foul up was that they chose to keep Lars and assorted other duds and instaed moved Rizzo. Bad move. Bad decision. There is no counter argument.