Dipre

Roy Halladay, his perfect game and sub 1 ERA beg to differ.

Sign Brad Lidge.:thumbsup:

He gets Arizona and Houston in his next two starts. Arizona's a dangerous offense, but they swing a lot, and Lol @ Hou.

Also, this is correct. As i stated above, getting Napoli for three years only perpetuated a problem the Sox currently have and need to fix, it doesn't make sense to trade a player who's proven to be superior over bigger sample sizes for a player whose performance for a full season (and who's a defensive butcher, to boot) remain to be seen, and for three seasons. It defies logic.

Sample sizes: Use them. And LOL@YOU thinking you can evaluate a player better than a ML ballclub.

Napoli's games played last three seasons: 233, .879 OPS, 128 OPS+ V-Mart's games played last three seasons: 375, .838 OPS, 121 OPS+. Martinez has played 142 games more than Napoli. Napoli has been more of a part-time player, and over more significant sample sizes, offensive performances tend to even out with hitter tendencies and weaknesses becoming more exposed. I don't need to explain this to you, but as usual, when you're "Doiji'd" with a player logic eludes you, and no amount of numbers or logical arguments will be enough to counteract the blatant bias. Feel free to use logic and not dodge particular subjects (Sample sizes anyone?) (Role-player vs full time regular anyone?) (Decline in offensive performances as the year goes on due to the rigors of catching FULL TIME) when making an assesment of a player. Martinez is clearly a better hitter and player than Napoli, who is a role player. You could at least get your facts straight. Napoli caught 87 games last year, and as a catcher, he had an .817 OPS. Napoli has never had to deal with the rigors of being a regular catcher, and that's a very real issue, whether you'd like to admit it or not. Mike Scioscia knowsmore about baseball than either of us, and he doesn't use Napoli as his main catcher, because both his D are awful, and because he (and possibly the rest of the league) see him as more as a part time player. If he were to put up an entire season of above-average hitting from the C position, then you could make an argument about his offensive potential, but as usual, you're making an argument out of thin air and spouting it as fact. You can't project a catcher's offensive prowess (if he's a regular catcher) over a full season as if he were any other regular player because of the rigors associated with catching. And seeing as Napoli has never played a full season in the Major Leagues (114 games is his top mark), it's impossible to compare his worth to a full-time player such as Victor Martinez. Then again, i shouldn't have to tell you this, but for some reason, i am forced to. Objectivity escapes you. You like Napoli (like so many other players before him) so you completely ignore obvious flaws or problems with his skillset in order to prove a point that isn't there. Napoli is not worth more to this team than Martinez because he is not a regular catcher, and would perpetuate a problem we already have. The objective answer (as in, the answer given by someone who doesn't have a hard-on for a player and is not fed by bias) is to get a better defensive catcher who is proven to be able to handle the rigors of catching full time.

5.87 ERA, 1.8 WHIP. If you look for the word "suck" in an illustrated dictionary, a picture of Masterson comes up next to the definition. He's sucking, and you were bitching about it a couple days back.

1) Napoli's not an elite power hitting catcher. He's also not in V-Mart's league offensively, and saying otherwise is downright ridiculous. 2) Napoli's awful defensively, to the point where a cacher who can barely touch a .700 OPS has him relegated to near-bench duty. 3) Stop over-hyping players you like and stick to facts. Napoli is what he is, an offense-first catcher with above average power. Saying the Angels would demand more than V-Mart for Napoli borders on the ridiculous.

Napoli is not Victor Martinez......who we already have.

If this is a joke, it's a pretty good one.

I didn't even touch the utter idiocy of the notion of giving up Casey Kelly for Mike f***ing Napoli. Wow.

And was publicly ridiculed on the board for doing so. I liked Lee better than Beckett, because AL East success aside, Lee's health record and ability to throw strikes and get outs with lesser velocity was better geared towards aging well. Time will tell.

Big chance one of Lackey and Beckett (or both) step up and fill that role. Lackey's a known "June and on" pitcher, and they'll probably figure out what's wrong with Beckett sooner rather than later.

Lol i don't get why this is such a big deal. Couple things: 1) I'm new to the league, found that they have no start or innings cap, so i assumed it was okay to stream as many starters as i wanted to. A simple PM telling me the reason why there was no cap was because the league set-up didn't allow it would have sufficed. SFOC's post came out as harsh and bad-mouthed, therefore Ital's involvement. 2) I could care less if i had to stop streaming, but wouldn't it have been easier to make a post saying that people shouldn't stream so much instead of coming out with the agressiveness? 3) If you put a, let's say, 8-move per week cap, then i could still stream six starters in a week, and keep two moves around for position players, and that's what i usually do anyway, but made a lot more moves this week because i was f***ed in ERA and WHIP. 4) I don't want to create controversy with older league members or anything, but there could have clearly been a more delicate way to handle this. I don't mean this as an attack to anyone, but seriously....