Dipre

Good velocity and sink, but no way to get lefties out. I assume they think they can correct that if they're trying to keep him around.

Wakefield's done, cut him. But they may be able to get something out of Albers.

Oy Vey.

You got it all wrong. What i meant is that i will quote you (replacing my existing quote) saying that Beckett sucks so that you can be constantly reminded that you kept riding the "Beckett sucks" wagon for months, i wasn't saying that you backpedal at all.

If Beckett pitches well (and i believe he will) you will have the honor and pleasure of being quoted on my sig as part of an "i told you so" campaign. Get excited!

Cheers mate! Oh, and on the original topic, it all depends on how long it takes him to fully regain his timing after the surgery. 40+ (like he hit in 2009) probably nets him the HR title.

Getting defensive? I don't think so. Even the usually calm Tito was very annoyed by this. It wasn't a "harmless comment", it was an act of sheer stupidity.

Spring Training Games: The absolutely best predictor of regular season success or failure for MLB players.

Finn is quickly becoming my favorite baseball writer. The bolded parts made me chuckle.

That's called being diplomatic. If it's so much easier to manage a team when you have money, why does Omar Minaya not have a job? The "win-now" mentality of teams that spend more money is a definite pressure point of why handling a city with high expectations for a team is not easy. It is what it is.

2012. The comparison was all around. I suspect they meant Alex Gonzales in his prime.

He's looked good lately, but their point was basically his "Which Dice-K will you get?" act. On another note: Both Finn and Abraham are very high on Iglesias. They speak wonders about his offensive advancement, ability to put bat on ball and increased patience at the plate. Their take on it is that he's hit better than the Sox expected and he's adopted a more patient approach quicker than they expected. Their take on him is Alex Gonzales with a better OBP and BA but less power. That would do. They also think he will be the starting SS in 2011. His slight frame shouldn't be a problem, since there are a lot of productive major leaguers who have above-average power and have a very slight frame.

Notes from around the internet: Notes from the meeting between Theo and Gonzo's agent: In the Boston Globe podcast, Chad Finn and Peter Abraham both think that neither Scutaro nor Mike Cameron will (or should) get traded, and they deemed the idea "ridiculous". They also endorsed (again) the idea of Scutaro as the starting Shortstop because of Lowrie's versatility, and their stance on Cameron had to do with his ability to hit lefties, Drew's health, and Ortiz' vulnerability against lefties, Kalish not being ready being the other point. They also expressed zero optimism about Dice-K, and that is not a good thing.

Reports indicate that he's ok, and that there's even the possibility that he makes his next start against the Marlins.

Lol says a guy who used to manage the Yankees. Lol.

I'd pose the question in a different way, because you could make the argument that even while healthy, contracts as big as those always carry a lot of risk with pitchers. I'd say: "Would you trade for either one of them if their team kicked in some money?" And i'd respond that if Beckett shows he's healthy, seeing as his problems are not mechanical and he was the receiver of some bad luck last year, i would probably trade for him over Burnett. It's not because Beckett is on the Sox, but because his problem is identifiable and, if healthy, there's a good chance he could come close to at least 2009 numbers. But with Burnett, who the hell knows?

This, the "why can Burnett rebound but Beckett can't" discussion does have past iterations, but the re-mention of it is pertinent, because the way i see it, we have every reason to believe that, if healthy, he can go back to being a serviceable pitcher at the least, and i'd argue that given the fact that his velocity remained steady and his actual problem was injury, the chances of him bouncing back are pretty good. The Sox rotation isn't "ironclad" but it's not as unlikely to be very very good as Jacko has proposed several times in attempts to minimize the superiority of the Sox rotation when compared to the Yankee rotation.

Final touches on the extension before announcing it after Opening Day?

First off, i'm glad to see you are so consistently keeping tabs on what i do (although it is honestly a bit creepy) but it's good to know i'm renting a space on your brain for free. Anything for free is good. Second, this is not an attempt to "attack Jacko" per se, but rather point out incorrect characterizations presented in the post that sparked the discussion: First off, no one has referred to the Red Sox rotation as "ironclad" everyone knows Beckett and Dice-K are basically a flip of the coin, however, what ORS was right to call him out on (funny you don't mention him anywhere but continue your vendetta against me, again, free space) is the fact that expressing optimism for Beckett is not like going after fool's gold, and the indications are there that he could go back to being a serviceable pitcher. Just like Burnett could. So why is it so difficult for that scenario to come to fruition? Anyways, if you want to refer to this as trolling, then by all means do it, but it seems like your definition is incorrect because this is a legitimate topic of discussion. Why doesn't Beckett have a chance at bouncing back? The velocity is there, the stuff is there, but he's a head case that has problems staying healthy, just like Burnett. Anyways, i would very much appreciate it if you stopped being an annoying little prick and got off my nuts. I did not issue any personal attacks against Jacko, simply discussing the issue of bias, making your personal attack unwarranted. Go away.

Ahhh, the master of logical thinking strikes yet again. I'm going to explain it like you're four years old: Premise A: Beckett and Burnett both had s*** years in 2010. Premise B: Beckett and Burnett both have, because of their respective issues, similar chances of either bouncing back or flaming out in 2011. Therefore, we can conclude that saying that one has better chances than the other would probably come with an ulterior motive. Context. Reading comprehension, etc etc etc. It doesn't matter where he says it, it's an issue of "par for the course" logical fallacy, one you are very adept at engaging in by the way, making your contribution (while missing the point as well) highly unsurprising. Congrats.