Gom

Why would other teams be willing to trade for a player unless that player was made available?

You are the gayest person on TalkSox for making that comment.

Nothing is wrong with Bay. His OPS is .906, and his career OPS is .892. Law of averages. He's coming back to his historical norms. What should alarm Red Sox fans is the following: April 1.123 May .978 June .701 July .422 [two games, insignificant]

Of course I would like to go back to 1996-2000. Why wouldn't I? Also, I don't hate the Mets. They're my second favorite team. An extremely distant, almost invisible on the horizon 2nd, but still second. :thumbsup:

This makes little to no sense to me. Why trade a player when his value is at his lowest? This is the same pitcher who was very successful his entire career going into this year, and you can never have too much pitching. More idiocy from the village idiot, Cashman.

This thread should be closed. Anyone who argues this point should be banned for stupidity.

Two games back. Looking good...but with Halladay tomorrow, I really hope the Sox lose so we can stay 2 out.

We were the underdogs in 2001. Didn't hurt any less, probably hurt more because we were oh-so-close.

The truth is that the Yankees would have been better off not resigning Arod. That contract is the next albatross, the next Giambi signing. You guys act like we haven't had rough stretches. From 1979 until 1995, a span of 16 years, we didn't even make the playoffs. I can understand bandwagon fans, like your Red Sox Nation feeling all weird. Us long-time fans haven't even flinched. Remember..it isn't about you, it's about us. To us, the Red Sox are a nuisance, not a hated enemy. If you guys win 2 out of the next three, then yeah, fine. A hated enemy. The reality is that Yankee fans hate the Red Sox primarily because Red Sox fans hate us. We never hated the Orioles, and they were our biggest rivals in the late 90s.

C'mon a700, look at the time of my post. I went to bed. The Sox aren't the bullies of baseball. No one is. Baseball is in a historical time-period of parity. You guys have won two championships in the span of 5 years now. Good, but not great. Four out of five is bullying. That being said, I think that if the Yankees had won in 2001, 2004 would have been devastating. It wasn't anywhere near that because 2001 WAS devastating. Say what you want crunchy...but how many teams have been down 3-0 and then came back and won in baseball? Zero. However...how many teams have been 1 STRIKE away from winning with the tying run NOT at the plate? With a game in hand? None in baseball history. How do you choose. I've talked to Sox fans who were around for both 78 and 03, and they tell me it isn't even close. 86 hands down. All you can say now is Yankee fans have an inkling of what it was like to suffer like Sox fans. Just an inkling however.

You know what's funny? Idiots like DrSoxFan can't take the fact that a good percentage of Yankee fans, if not the majority, really didn't care as much as they wanted them to. Sure, we lost. Sure, the team choked. No big deal. It happens. We won in 96, 98, 99, and 2001. We had crushing losses in 97 and 01. We were steamrolled in 2002. We won...we lost...and we got used to it. We were happy when we won, and sad when we lost. However, having been there so often in such a short span, it tempered things. The "fact" of the matter is that you hate us 100 times more than we hate you. For the average Red Sox fan, there is a loathing for the Yankees that we can't even understand. There isn't a Yankee fan who understands DECADES of frustration. For the Yankee fan, the Red Sox are a nuisance to be disposed of, a fly to be swatted. We don't, we can't hate you like you hate us. You just haven't been good enough for long enough, or beaten us enough. It kills morons like DrSoxFan that we really didn't get crushed like you did in 2003, or even better in 1986. We just said f*** it....and it's about time. Personally, I think being ONE STRIKE AWAY from winning the WORLD SERIES with a two-run lead and no one on is a bigger choke. Not even close. Especially when the scoreboard read "Congratulations Red Sox". In case you didn't believe it, here is the link from the Globe: http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/articles/2004/10/22/one_strike_away_the_standard_for_booting_victory_is_set/ I LOVE IT!!!

Funny. You're debating how I felt. It's amazing that some of you guys think you know how I feel better than I do. Kilo and Bosox21 were pretty much dead on: Kilo: 1. It was the World Series Correct. 2. It was the last hurrah for a lot of guys on that "Yankee Dynasty" Correct. Knowing that O'Neil was gone, and realizing that we were seeing the end of a dynasty hurts. You guys wouldn't know. 3. They had the lead in the 9th inning of Game 7 of said WS Yes. After being outplayed, and two miraculous comebacks in games 4 & 5...coming so close. 4. It was the first time Yankee fans saw the chink in the armor and experienced a crushing defeat with Mo on the mound Not true. 1997 against the Guardians...but it did hurt. 5. It was immediately after 9/11 when NYers could've really used the emotional lift This is one of the biggest factors. We NYers are superior to the rest of the country. That's why you all hate us so much. Ok, I'm just kidding. But New York is America. People think of America, they think of the Empire State Building, the Statue of Liberty, and the Twin Towers. We had one of our icons taken away, our innocence stripped away. All the pain of 9/11 came back to me when I saw the tattered flag at the WS. Winning...would have been storybook. It would have meant so much to the city, a healing. It was not meant to be, and things are sometimes as such. The Red Sox didn't hurt. Not at all. It was disgusting...like watching a team lose a 9 run lead like you did the other night. It wasn't heart-wrenching like you guys think. Heart-wrenching is when you lose a close game in the 9th. Disgusted is the feeling when you choke. Most fans I know were tempered by Boone in 2003. Turnabout is fair play, and we accepted it. I still contend that you Red Sox fans felt something similar to us in 2001 when you lost in 2003. After 2001...2004 was easy for us.

You are correct. I need to make another deal immediately.

I wasn't. The Diamondback one killed us more than the Red Sox one did. Not even close.

I vote for Jacko to keep them going. If you don't like what's on TV, change the channel. Same premise. Plus, it makes Jacko feel important. He needs it more than you guys know.

Took me long enough to make another deal.

Oh my God...it's f***ing Eric Hinske...who couldn't even be a full-time player on the Pirates. Holy s***...

Either way, this is not a move to put the Yankees over the top.

You have a LONG way to go to get under my skin. Trust me.

Not to mention WHIP, in which Sabathia has an edge. Sabathia pitches in a bandbox in Yankee Stadium. Fenway is a hitters park, but not like Coors East. I don't put much stock in FIP, I don't like the formula much, and neither with BABIP. I think the theory is flawed. That being said, you've made a strong point defending your opinion. I just don't see much of a difference between the two because the calculations I use show a wash. By the end of the year, they'll finish withing 15 points of each other in ERA, WHIP will be within .10. They are both aces with dominant stuff, and will finish close..and are close. My opinion, again.

Cashman had nothing to do...so he made the deal. It does benefit in theory as follows: Hinske gives the Yankees a decent bat and allows them to rest Arod once a week according to the Phillipon Rules. It allows Pena to go to the minors, where the Yankees want to play him in the outfield a bit to see if he cam be a super-sub type, coming in defensively in every late-inning win. He'll be back in about two months anyways. Hinske can play 1B, 3B, and OF. He can cover 4 postions adequetely [CF below average]. This gives them some versatility on the bench. Hinske sees 4.05 pitches an at-bat. Another grinder, helping get into the weaker underside of most teams rotations. Now...I'd love to take credit for knowing all this s*** about a marginal, 1-2 day a week player, but I took all this information off of a Joel Sherman article in the NY Post.

No offense taken whatsoever. I forget that you're new and you don't know my panties don't get bunched up that quickly. I just view player as just that. Hitter, pitcher, fielder...any and all of the above. Some people think pitchers are not players...that pitchers shouldn't win MVPs. It's a personal definition.

I never said anything about CC...but yes, he's been hit or miss this year as well. If you calculate park factors...the gap shrinks. I have no desire to debate this further...I'm saying that this season, they've been pretty much a wash. You are entitled to your opinion. If Beckett goes up and gives up 4 runs in 7 innings...his stats are worse. That's how close thy are.

Well, that is your opinion. It is not mine. Plus, I'd guess I've seen hundreds of games more than you have live. It is my opinion, after all. I don't see why anyone is debating my opinion on the matter.

I think everyone puts too much blame [and conversely gives too much credit] to the managers based upon the outcome. You can pinch-hit Pujols and he can hit a line drive caught on the run on the warning-track by the CF, or you can pinch-hit Nick Green and he can hit a bloop single between three players to win the game. Blame the manager if he makes the WRONG move before the outcome is decided. If you lose with your best, how can you blame him? That being said, Tito didn't make any bad moves...and no one was criticizing his moves [lineup, rotation, etc.] when you were up 10-1. Can't have it both ways.