Jump to content
Talk Sox
  • Create Account

jacksonianmarch

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    45,923

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Profiles

Boston Red Sox Videos

2026 Boston Red Sox Top Prospects Ranking

Boston Red Sox Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

Guides & Resources

2025 Boston Red Sox Draft Pick Tracker

News

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by jacksonianmarch

  1. jacksonianmarch
    Arredondo was resigned today under his real name, Fernando Perez. The initial scouting reports remain, 6.4 60 yard dash, so he had 80 speed. But he is 19 yrs old, not 16
  2. jacksonianmarch
    The results of his MRI were leaked.
  3. jacksonianmarch
    Who would have made that comment then? Who? Bay didnt, he refuted it. The Mets didnt, why would they bash their new acquisition. The Red Sox leaked that.
  4. jacksonianmarch
    Wait, are you trying to say that Yankee stadium allowed 24% more homers than the average stadium? Cause if that's what you are saying, then you arent comparing apples and oranges
  5. jacksonianmarch
    They broke the rules, but nobody will be held accountable for it
  6. jacksonianmarch
    If 0 is completely unrelated and 1 is absolutely related, then 0.3 is much closer to unrelated than it is to related. If you want to prove something to be related, you typically want a 95% correlation, which means that in your specific study, there is only a 5% likelihood that the results you have found were based on chance alone. With the 0.3 correlation, there is a 70% chance that your conclusion is based on chance alone. That means that it is almost as statistically unrelated as it can be. Actually, based on the numbers, there is a 70% chance that the correlation is completely unrelated. When you put it that way, you should probably drop the argument
  7. jacksonianmarch
    They're safe regardless because the source will never be revealed. But we know that the source is the FO and they essentially divulged results from an MRI on a player that was no longer under contract with them. Hence, the waiver doesnt apply any more to the Sox.
  8. jacksonianmarch
    Wow, you read that completely wrong
  9. jacksonianmarch
    hence why I put it in quotes genius
  10. jacksonianmarch
    Did I say they were repeating? I just said that ARod is prime to have a monster yr
  11. jacksonianmarch
    what is the point of that post. You are a sox fan, of course you want Lowell to put up good numbers. I also want the Yankees to win, people to live happy lives and me to win the lottery.
  12. jacksonianmarch
    HIPAA.
  13. jacksonianmarch
    that typically doesnt happen. It usually is a motivator
  14. jacksonianmarch
    That he does. But the only flaw in his game was his "clutch" factor. That's gone now. He's gonna be a monster this upcoming yr. He has absolutely no pressure on him.
  15. jacksonianmarch
    and a world series victory
  16. jacksonianmarch
    http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=4853444 not bad for a perennial choker.
  17. jacksonianmarch
    Weiland is a pitchability kind of guy. SP gives him a lot of credit, as they do with most of their SRs. The 90-95mph range is actually sitting 90-92 while topping out at 95mph. That's completely different than someone who sits at 95mph. The overwhelming majority of these guys will be relievers since the sox are a big market team and unless the prospect is unreal, they wont get the rotation slot.
  18. jacksonianmarch
    It is absolutely amazing that some people could actively deny that the sox spin machine exists. Absolutely amazing. The Sox violated Bay's rights, I hope they get hit with a violation
  19. jacksonianmarch
    I think they are stuck with each other. Cashman wants more offense out of LF than Gardner can provide and Damon is not the same player outside of NY.
  20. jacksonianmarch
    Wait, did my position just benefit from the ORS hammer? Nice
  21. jacksonianmarch
    wow, lots of denail here. Example, every time they lose a FA that they wouldnt mind retaining, there is some backlash in the media. Happens every single time. Boston just isnt content with saying that they lost him, they have to tarnish the guy on the way out the door to make it look like they werent outmanuevered or werent undervaluing the player. We'll see how far that gets them this yr when Bay hits his standard 30+ homers and drives in 100+RBI in Flushing while the sox middle of the order is run through like a buzzsaw through tinder.
  22. jacksonianmarch
  23. jacksonianmarch
    If that splitty doesnt come back, then I expect him to have a wake-up call in 2010. If that thing does come back, then he'll be devastating
  24. jacksonianmarch
    He definitely could be and I hope it happens. I just dont think its gonna happen in 2010. He's not going to be ready for the start of the yr. That much is a given. And when it comes to shoulders, nobody knows how long, if ever, it takes to come back. Banking on him for anything more than a minor league deal on a team that is expected to win the world series is a good way to be let down. Gaudin is our contingency plan, and a fine one at that. Wang could be our pie in the sky player. Who knows. Also, it sounds like Wang wont be signing until April unless he gets blown away. If the yankees have an injury or Hughes/Chamberlain are ineffective in that #5 role, I wouldnt be surprised to see Wang come back into the fold
  25. jacksonianmarch
    In all of these seeds of discontent, there are seeds of truth. I dont doubt the report, I do doubt the extent of his injury and the convenient timing of the report. Also, trying to predict the life of a player based on arthritis and cartilage or lack thereof is a fool's game.
×
×
  • Create New...