Gom

The Yankees cheat. Deal with it Jacko. Cashman steals the other GMs lunch money.

JHB, because you only seem to do this stuff when it benefits your team. You are the least objective person to ever come here. People are starting to see this now, what I've known for a while. You know I believe you haven't posted them in other games? Because it probably went against the Yankees or was insignificant. Where are the numbers from Red Sox games? How come the bias in only Yankee games when they win? You seem to have a tendency to selectively choose which statistics to point out, and only to make your point, and ignoring the statistics that would discredit your results. In the other thead, I listed Ryan Church for the very reason of not wanting to "cherry pick". Your credibility here is close to zero at this point. Try to fix that, for your own sake. See, if you did it for EVERY game, then you'd have a point. But if you look at the numbers, and only post them in games the Yankees win, and only when you view them as significant....no one buys what you say. I want everyone to know that I kept this post very clean, with no hidden agendas or meanings. THIS WAS VERY FREAKING HARD FOR ME TO DO!!!!!

So now the umpires are cheating for the Yankees? Are you alluding this again? Just curious. [P.S. I haven't watched the game to see if what he's saying is true].

I hope we don't end up saying that about his career.

They've been throwing before first pitch.

I don't care if Jeter ever hits another homer. I just want him to hit .330.

I don't think that Red Sox fans think he's a bad shortstop, just a bad defensive one. I think he's a poor defensive SS myself, but over his career, his offense has more than made up any defensive deficiencies. This year, not so much.

I never said it didn't matter. I'm just wondering, in this case, which stat do you think is more likely to predict tomorrow's outcome? Is he more the pitcher in his overall stats vs. Toronto, or at the Rogers Centre? Just putting it out there for speculation, without any real feeling either way.

Great post, rician. Except for one thing. If you were 10.5 games out instead of us, would RSN feel the same way? I doubt it. If Theo said what you said, then the Yankees should compete 10 years out of 10 due to the fiscal advantages we have. The Yankees money should allow them to outspend the competition in the three years the Red Sox would be unable to. It's kind of simple logic, don't you think?

Two starts Bill. Before this upcoming game, he has a 5.18 ERA against Toronto period in four career starts, with a .278 BAA. Which one do you think was more indicative? Two starts in Toronto, or four starts overall?

Read this link. Jacko would rather be in last place with a good farm system than in first place with a s***** one. It's just the way he is. I can see why you guys keep him around. Trust me, he is not indicative of the intelligent Yankee fan. Jacko, the last deal had Kennedy in it, not Hughes. Follow the link dude. http://www.northjersey.com/sports/mets/Yankees_played_a_big_hand_in_allowing_the_Mets_to_complete_a_trade_for_Johan_Santana.html Umm..it's the same link I listed before in this thread. Try reading it this time. Would I rather be the Mets? No. Would I rather have traded for Santana instead of the Mets? Yes. Wanna know something? Kennedy, Hughes, Melky and a prospect....plus the 130+ million....is still a steal for us. Your "crown jewel" would have stayed. Wake up. I pray you stop self-medicating.

The last proposed trade you list wasn't the last one. Anyways, my point remains. When given the opportunity, prospects should be sacrificed for veterans, and in no small part due to the big market teams ability to recompensate themselves quickly by throwing more money into drafting/scouting. The money aspect makes it a near lock as to what should be done. My opinion. Want to change this? Make the draft world-wide, and have a set salary for slots. Otherwise, our teams will always be able to replenish quickly, both in the minor and major league areas. If you trade prospects for veterans, you win most of the time. That much is obvious.

Varitek is good at calling games, not great.

Read this link. http://www.northjersey.com/sports/mets/Yankees_played_a_big_hand_in_allowing_the_Mets_to_complete_a_trade_for_Johan_Santana.html Yankee fans [with the exception of Jacko, who thinks everyone in our minor league system is God]....be careful. You will be sick with anger when you realize what Cashman turned down from the Twins. Red Sox fans, the final offer was Ellsbury, Masterson, and Lowrie, I believe. Enjoy.

The reason I put in Church is because you don't always win. Church had better numbers, but then got hurt. That deal will end up hurting the Mets [i didn't really care for it, but hey...]. However, they went for the win this year, and they are a better team for the next 3 years with the deals they made. The Yankees and Sox are worse. If you always won, there wouldn't be a debate. However, you guys are also failing to see that the risk was very small. Here is a Cy Young pitcher, young, healthy....it really didn't get much better than that.

Tex makes little sense for the Sox. They may decide to move Youk to left. However, why bother? Money better spent elsewhere. Same really with the Yankees.

Bonds will not sign with anyone. You really think the owners/GMs didn't get together and say no? Any team that signs him will not be able to do a thing with any other team. My opinion anyways.

I was hoping you'd trade Lester instead of Buchholz. Don't forget, I'm a Yankee fan.

I thought I told you to shut up dreilly.

The whole point is not which system is better. You can't really argue against building homegrown talent in the long run. However, stop being like Jacko and JHB and don't look at things in a vacuum. The very fact of the fiscal power that the Yankees, Red Sox, and Mets have allows them to do both. If you can't see it, then you are truly ignorant about the economics of baseball. When you state the core agreement, we fundamentally disagree. I believe in veterans, you believe in prospects. Let's agree to disagree, so as not to go back and forth. Money is the overriding factor. The very aspect of money is actually what allows your team and mine to make this work. Many players, such as Hughes for us, have fallen into our laps when they rightfully shouldn't have because they would have demanded more money than the teams drafting ahead of us would be willing to afford. I refuse to believe that you are as ignorant as some others here to think that money hasn't also given us a huge advantage in scouting/development/drafting as well as in the free agent/trading market at the big league level. You're not going to win every deal. No one does. However, I believe that trading prospects for veterans benefits the teams in the short run most definitely, and usually in the long run as well. When you include the money aspect, the ability to outdraft your opponents and fix the mistakes you make in trading/free agents, it becomes a no-brainer.

I think Minaya beats Cashman again. I kind of hope so too. I would much rather see CC or Sheets than Tex.

They wanted Buchholz. Their final package would have included Buchholz and not Lester. Redo the numbers with Buchholz instead of Lester. The Mets won't hit bottom due to their spending power? THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT. My goodness, now that I know what a strawman is [i admit, I didn't know], I think I have a new name for you. It defeats the purpose if you can't stay in contention. Not only that, but they traded away Milledge for Church, and so far, that's a no-brainer as well. Church has outperformed Milledge in every sense of the game. You know what you don't see? That if they have a good draft this year and next, in three years, they're going to start to see those players having an effect on the majors! Am I destined to be surrounded by such tomfoolery? Once again, because of the Yankees, Red Sox, and Mets significant advantages in money, they have the ability to do both, both build from within while using their financial advantage to compete in the free agent/trade market. Wherein drafting and scouting has more of an element of luck to it than with players at the major league level, the majority of the money should be allocated as such, while still having a final dollar value in scouting/development that should be higher than the rest of the competitors. I'm not surprised you miss the point ORS. I'd be actually surprised had you gotten it. The point is that the Brewers made the deal. The point is the Mets made the deal. You really think you're a better team this year with Masterson, Buchholz, and Ellsbury than Santana?

Unless you're a braindead Yankee fan, in order for you to get superstar player, you're going to have to give up the gems. Once those gems come up to the big show, you need to replace them anyways. See, the thing is this...with a player like Youkilis....you don't need to worry about that position for 5 years at the minimum. It's not like you're expecting an impact player per year. Ok, look at guys the Red Sox gave up for Beckett and Lowell. The major jewel was Hanley. Was it worth it? Of course. Who's to say that when Hanley becomes a free agent, the Red Sox don't try to get him back? It is easier to find gems than the finished product, ORS. Many of the so-called "gems" end up being nothing more than coal in your stockings. Not because I hate the Red Sox, but I hope the Sox miss the post-season by one game. Then I'll have all winter to tell you guys you f***ed up like we did. Here's another way to look at it. The Yankees kept their crown jewels, and so did the Red Sox, when offered Santana. The Mets "bankrupted" their farm system to get Santana. As of today, 8/22/08, the Yankees are a near-lock to miss the post-season for the first time since 1993. The Red Sox are battling it out with the White Sox/Twins for the right to lose to the Angels in the first round. The Mets? With a depleted and decimated farm system? First place.