Dojji

Throws 90 at age 17? Tops out in the mid 90's (which I'm cautiously considering a "tops out at 94 but we want to hype the guy so we say 'mid 90's'" thing) Still, to get even to 94 at that age is pretty interesting. Sounds like the kid has a chance. And with those teams all going after him, his agent has to be feeling very good about things right now.

He's kinda right though -- really, that other thread should be in this forum.

You realize that they feel the same way about hockey in the United States -- especially outside the Northeast.

Actually Ortiz is no stranger to bunting. He's done it from time to time to try to keep the overshift honest. I honestly think he should do it more often -- with the 3B playing shortstop there's a huge hole down the third base line if he can deaden it. And if he did it consistently, or tried it consistently, against the overshift he'd beat a few out and force the manager to think twice about giving him that much bunting room. If he could intimidate the overshift a little he'd probably get more honest hits for awhile. Especially he should bunt with a lefty on the mound, since the pitcher is almost obliged to field bunts in an overshift, and the bunt play down the third base line is fairly awkward for an LHP to field.

We've got about twice our "share" that's for sure. Reddick's gotta be something like #105 too.

no Reddick? oh BTW -- note Hagadone at #100. Sox draft picks FTW.

For the record, I'd go $12-15 mil for Carlos Pena next offseason, slide him into Beltre's spot in the lineup when Adrian moves on next year, and play Youkilis at third base. The defense will be worse than Beltre-Youkilis, but the offense will be very, very much better.

Eventually baseball will return to Montreal, I feel. Realistically the city and surrounding area are more than big enough to support a team. I don't think it's nearly weak enough as a market to become the first town, ever, that baseball abandoned and didn't come back to. If they do come back I feel they'd to best as an American League team. As the Expos of the National League, they really had no immediate neighbors and had to really work to find rivalries to get people excited about. In the AL they'd benefit from immediate regional rivalries with Toronto and Boston, as well as the Camden Yards Effect for both Sox and Yankee fans, which would help buoy up the franchise while it started over trying to build a local fanbase.

I agree. Mauer is too much of a good thing for Minnesota. Unless their new stadium really helps their revenue problems I'd say it's 50-50 Mauer moves on, and it's only 50-50 as opposed to a sure thing because of Mauer himself maybe being willing to cut the Twins a generous deal to stay -- there has been a fair bit of speculation there.

For Joe Mauer, a then 28 year old catcher with every conceivable catching tool, the Red Sox would go over the Luxury Tax and be grateful it's not a hard cap. I'm 100% positive. Imperial, are you counting Beckett coming off the books as part of that $82M? Because it's entirely possible we will extend Beckett, and fairly generously at that. In fact, I hope they do.

How much should we draw the distinction between players who play a role because that's the role they fell into, they're doing well, and there's no real need to rock that particular boat, rather than what they might have been capable of if the team had pushed them to their maximum potential? Papelbon's upside as a starter is a possible example, Masterson if he'd stayed in Boston as another. With a guy like Weiland, or Bowden, or Tazawa, or Doubront, if they mature as relievers instead of starters because the Sox's roster was so crowded, but COULD have settled in as half decent starters, do we count that the same as a player who is in the bullpen (like, say, Delcarmen) because he doesn't have starting ability at all? Or is it really all about what a player PROVES they can do, and unproven potential doesn't even count? How do you parse that out?

Comes down to how much we're prepared to spend to make the playoffs this season IMHO. How many other flaws you see in the team that Kovalchuk wouldn't fix on his own. I'm personally fairly neutral. As long as you can fit him under the cap without disrupting longterm plans, I'm good with Kovalchuk.

we're officially scraping bottom. We thought we'd hit bottom before, but now we know better. This is it.

I'd say that's a full 360.

Well, that and the Mets beat their reported best offer anyhow.

You haven't even presented plausible evidence it was a leak by the Sox FO. Your whole argument is based on the FO supplying the information to the press and frankly, all you've presented to support that is a fairly feeble motive. Like they wouldn't have been able to justify the Bay non-signing simply by pointing to Lackey. Sorry, doesn't make sense.

So your contention is that they're willing to risk any prospective future FA signings and the goodwill of Bay's agent for the sake of spin control. Sorry, a700, I'm looking for a motive, not an excuse.

I think you're ignoring motive too. what do the Sox even gain from having this info come out? With nothing gained, there's no motive.

the FO isn't the only group involved in any contract negotiation. even if it WAS leaked, there's no particular evidence it was the Sox FO that leaked it -- rather than, say, Bay's agent letting something slip after it was no longer important to conceal it, or even a source from the Commissioner's office which IIRC approves every deal.

The complete truth includes context. In this case, the context was provided, since everything here was done in the context of a contract negotiation. To protect Bay, yeah. The best way to use that info if the team wanted to, was to play public contract hardball, go public, scare away other suitors, and force Bay to downgrade his asking price. Instead, Theo made good use of the discipline he has cultivated within the FO that makes the Red Sox the most leak-proof FO in the game. Out of respect for a player who was in the process of signing with someone else. Actually true but only if Bay had not yet signed a contract. Once he'd signed a deal the motive goes out the window. As does their motive to withhold the info. I think that the media had been onto this information for awhile, but the Sox managed to keep it out of the actual reports through a combination of polite requests and threatening to withdraw some prized contacts if something came out in the media that embarrassed them unduly. Once Bay signed, there was no reason to leash the media.

since I don't believe it's a smear in any light, and since I believe the Sox went out of their way to smear Bay as little as possible, gonna say no here. Unless it's the complete truth. The complete truth is never a smear, no matter how it reflects on the player/. And since neither of those apply to the Bay case (dude all we're talking about here is maybe a risk analysis that encouraged the Sox to reduce their offer -- they still WANTED BAY) I'm not sure where you're going with that.

Nomar earned his reputation as a sulker by being unwilling or unable to contain his emotions on the field and in the dugout. The Sox didn't smear him, he made HIMSELF look bad, and then he, HIMSELF, reaped the reward for that. All the Sox did was not renew a player who was trending downward and spending a lot of time on the DL. That and he hadn't been Real Nomar for about 3-4 years prior to that. Great player, bad risk.