Dipre

Thank you. You're not too bad yourself.

Ok, now the real opinions and the picture. Go!

You keep using batting average, which, like RBI's, is a piece of s*** stat. Cameron has always been an excellent CF with 25-homer power while playing in some of the worse and bigger parks in the Majors. They wanted to maximize the defensive potential of the OF, and put him in a situation on a ballpark where he could excel. There are many reasons why you fundamentally can't understand simple concepts like this, of which i will list some: 1) Bias. 2) Idiocy. 3) Lack of knowledge about the statistics you're trying to criticize. In fact, i'm willing to bet money you were one of the idiots who cried tears of blood when the Sox signed Beltre, and look how that turned out, and guess what, if healthy, Cameron may have provided similar career-year production, but you had your crystal ball which had told you with anticipation that Cameron was going to get injured. Try again. Oh, and by the way: Mike Cameron 2005-2009 OPS and OPS+ aggregate total: .799 and 111, meaning he was not only the best CF in the market (Career 5.1 UZR/150, another stat you probably hate since you don't understand). Again, thank God you don't work on the Red Sox FO.

Damn it, you're right! I mean it's not like a good hitter will hit anywhere. Well, there goes my interest in Hanley, Pujols and A-Gon.....thanks for clearing that up for me man!

The guys on CSNNE are probably around your level of skill in evaluating talent. And who is "everyone"? Talking in absolutes simply means you're pulling stuff out of your ass, which is unsurprising, given the way you've supported your opinions thus far. Try again.

Baseball for dummies, lesson 2: RBI is an incomplete stat: Why? Because it's dependent on the amount of opportunities you get to drive runners in, which aren't many if you hit behind Chase Utley and Ryan Howard. Better stat to know of a hitter's performance with men on base: Slash stats with men on base. Werth stats with men on base: RISP: .816 career OPS. Men on base: .842 career OPS. And this is including his injured years in LA. You're getting better, actually trying to use stats to back up your arguments. I like the progress.

Translation: Please go away. On topic: I noticed that in JimEd's thread, he doesn't have Atchison on the 25-man roster. Am i the only one who thinks he'd be serviceable as the final link in the bullpen?

The last four years of complete health with the Phillies: 2007: .863 OPS 2008: .861 OPS 2009: .879 OPS 2010: .921 OPS So what do i use as a benchmark were i to offer a contract? The years in which he was injured and wasn't a regular, or the last four years in which he's been healthy and raking? Thank God you're not the GM of the Red Sox, because "The wonder boy" does a hell of a better job than you would, good sir.

But, but, but, he's not as awesome as Crawford!

Your. Point. Is. Wrong. Talent and payday do not always correlate. Also, the problem here is that it's funny how you're really quick to play the victim card. If you want to keep it baseball, then let's keep it baseball, however, you shouldn't be surprised if people call you out on your "win now at any price, f*** later" mentality, because you've always exhibited it proudly. Overpaying by five million for a guy means not upgrading in areas of need for the team. And as i said before, it's easy to call out the FO for making fiscally irresponsible decisions later while pining for them to make it now. Can't have it both ways.

This. And the fact that one team is willing to overpay for a player's production (like it or not, they use statistics to compile a player's actual value) doesn't mean that's his actual value. As an attorney, you should that if someone is willing to pay 10 dollars for 3 dollar pound of chicken, that's idiocy, and doesn't represent the chicken's market value. And stop acting butthurt about the other post that i said was not directed at you, a disclaimer i did not make in this post because it was clearly directed at you a700.

http://www.csnphilly.com/11/11/10/Angels-Prepared-to-Make-Run-at-Crawford/landing_word_baseball.html?blockID=350345&feedID=7420 This is not stuff i'm pulling out of my ass, but an analysis made after seeing the stance of the Angels, who are prepared to go into a bidding war for Crawford, so how, under that scenario, you propose he gets less than the 20 million he seeks?

There are a couple things i keep reading that make no sense (to me): 1) How is Crawford a better fit than either Dunn/Werth if he's going to command superstar money when he's not a superstar. Both Werth and Dunn are better overall hitters than Crawford, and both significantly cheaper. In fact, from the link a700 posted, Werth's looking for 15 mill, and Crawford's going to get 20 per to steal a couple more bases, even though speed is the first thing that's going to go from his game. Ellsbury can do basically everything Crawford can do for a fraction of the cost, and while i agree that having both of them would be awesome, it wouldn't be as awesome with Crawford making 20 per. 2) God, no on AJ *******. Olivo and Martin (Doiji's hard-on for him notwithstanding) seem like better options. 3) Downs? No thanks. Type A and offered arb. There are other relievers who could get it done without surrendering draft picks. 4) Puma sounds nice on a one-year deal. Please don't pay Carl Crawford 20 million dollars: Dipre's dream off-season: Werth/ Crawford (17 per or less), Dunn/Puma, Olivo/Martin/Varitek , Feliciano, Sherrill, Putz, Balfour.

Whoa, well played Palodios, major props!

Did you read the prior posts? We were talking about options the FO could pursue should the Gonzales deal not become a reality, and Fielder, who is a damn good ballplayer in his own right, came into the conversation. Please DFTT.

We allow and encourage well-thought out opinions, which you have presented none of. What you have presented is an endless stream of stupidity that's making me lose brain cells at a pace unheard of in the history of humanity. If you want to criticize the FO, fine, but please, do so with a modicum of logic and avoid unabashed stupidity. Example of a well-thought out post criticizing the FO: "Well i believe it was a mistake to let Jason Bay go seeing how Mike Cameron got injured this year, which is to be expected with a player his age. Bad move by the FO". Example of a stupid post that only serves to lower the collective IQ of the board: Everything you've posted thus far. Catch my drift? Anyways, i'm done with you. You are either an idiot or a troll and i'm too busy getting ready to eat a heart-clogging steak to occupy my mind with you. Farewell, good sir.

Oh hi there, Mr. Troll. Actually, since i'm not sure you're a troll or just a teeny bit on the mentally retarded side, i'm going to make this a "for dummies" post: Baseball for dummies: Baseball fun game, i explain: 1)Pitcher throw ball to hitter. 2) Hitter try to hit ball with wooden bat (being fat is not a problem to hitting ball) 3) Guys with pretty gloves try to catch ball, if they can't, hitter gets a "hit". Prince Fielder fat, but he can hit, and he can field his position at least little bit, and he could play DH (a position in baseball where you hit but don't field, so no pretty glove). I hope you understood, through the use of simpler language, the fact that Prince Fielder is, while below average defensively a great hitter, and a good ballplayer. Don't give me that "fat f***" crap, if he can get it done with the stick and fake at 1st until he transitions to DH, bring him on.

Or a troll of legendary proportions with enough time in his hands to re-map the human genome....

Then who is Republican4Life38? They share a similar posting style, and are both on the same "ABSOLUTE MAX!!!" level on the annoyance chart. Maybe one and the same BOY?

Excuse me? Are we talking about the same Prince Fielder? Because the one i'm talking is a 26-year-old first baseman with a .919 career OPS and 192 Home Runs. There is something about you that just screams "troll". You seem eerily familiar to that "Fire_Theo" character that was banned a couple years ago.