italstallianion

Is this one of those 3 day ban things or is it permanent?

This is where I'm coming from. Right out of extra bases: "LaRoche's impressive seconds half splits are "nice," Epstein said, but they were not a "key component" in the decision. Epstein believes playing at Fenway will help LaRoche, because his natural swing drives the ball to left-centerfield." http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/extras/extra_bases/2009/07/epstein_on_trad.html?camp=localsearch:on:twit:sox Even if he doesn't hit to left all the time, he's still a better power hitter than Kotchman. He's still a better 2nd half hitter than Kotchman. I think we're only arguing formalities because it doesn't matter if he naturally hits to left or not, but I'm still defending my point. The truth is, regardless of who's right in the me vs. Dipre and ORS ordeal, he's still a much better power hitter than Kotchman and I still feel uneasy about that trade. So no matter what one person says or what a spray chart suggests, that won't change the uneasiness I feel about the trade. We can argue formalities all day but that won't change anything.

Over the top, perhaps, but nowhere near illogical. The accountant in me is s******* himself right now. I have a feeling I'll be called up to play SS for the Red Sox by the end of the Texas series.

Not to mention the whole "2nd half player" thing.

No. That's not the case. I do however think we shouldn't have acquired Woodward in the first place if we were going to get Gonzalez within a week later.

I've got a bad feeling about this...not that money is that much of an issue or anything, but how much money are we going to waste on these players that we'll end up releasing within a week? I'm not saying that'll necessarily be the case with Alex Gonzalez, but it makes the Woodward transaction an even bigger waste.

While it's an obviously small sample size, I still don't necessarily like the idea of trading LaRoche for Kotchman. That one still gets under my skin as I don't really get the motivation. I'm not ripping on Kotchman's performance in Boston. That's obviously way too small of a sample size. But to see the way LaRoche is playing in Atlanta and the way his swing is tailor made for Fenway, he looked like a perfect fit. Sorry to rehash an old trade but I really don't get it.

+1

I heard it from WEEI Radio.

Looks like we just signed our 7th rounder Madison Younginer. Sweet!!! Great potential from this guy. Now we just need to officially sign Renfroe and we're good.

I'd join, but I'm not a Pats fan, and I don't believe in joining a board like this unless I'm a fan of the team. Similarly, I don't believe in allowing fan's of other teams to post on a different team's board, so it would also be hypocritical of me to join talkpats.

And someone wanted him to come play 3B here. I definitely won't root for a Red Sox player with no intensity. He's got to have balls. (Emphasis on the s)

He's certainly good enough. That's also assuming he can stay on the field. He's got Mark Prior written all over him.

I did. I never said Chapman was better. However, you can't ignore the differences in situations regarding the two players. That's like wondering why JD Drew gets paid more than Dustin Pedroia. While I agree that Strasburg is much better, you can't ignore that one is a Free Agent while the other was just drafted.

Keep in mind that Chapman is a Free Agent, meaning that he can negotiate with any team. Strasburg can only speak with the Nationals, and if something doesn't work he goes to an Independent League and can reenter the draft. Chapman can deal with any team which should inflate the eventual paycheck due to competing teams.

Well my intent was to make an enormous post saying that you were stating the obvious. Then again I think it was obvious that you were stating the obvious, so technically by saying that you were stating the obvious, I was in fact, stating the obvious myself.

I can confirm that he's under 40. But other than that...

Well every investment looks favourable "if you can do it cheap". I believe the main criticism against signing Chapman is that it's too expensive, and therefore too risky. If you lessen the financial limitations, nearly every investment, or player in this scenario, becomes more reasonable. With all due respect, that's like saying if we can sign John Lackey and Matt Holliday for cheap while resigning Beckett, let's totally do it. Similarly, I don't think anyone will argue with you to make the "investment" if the cost is really low. That said, I agree with Crespo and I think the costs are extravagant when compared to the risks involved and probability of future production.

While I don't think Ortiz will be DFA'd (at least not for a while), I do believe that we'd have a pretty formidable lineup with Lowell as the DH, Youk at 3rd, Martinez at 1B/C, and an acquisition or some kind at 1B. (Instead of having Varitek at Catcher) Don't forget that David Ortiz is from the D.R. so there's a chance Minaya will take on his salary.

Oh well, we lost. If I had any inclinations that we had a chance of winning this game, I'd probably be pissed off right now.

Even though we lost (will most likely lose) I'm still happy with the fact that Buchholz went 7 innings and gave up 1 earned. That means Buchholz has pitched well in 4 of his 6 outings which is a good sign. In addition the 7 innings doesn't put much stress on the bullpen setting up our Texas series. Not to mention it was against Verlander, so that makes me feel slightly better about our offensive ineptness, especially considering Pedroia and Youkilis aren't in the lineup. If it was Miner/Lambert holding us scoreless, then that would be a larger reason for concern. Edit: Forgot that Drew wasn't in the lineup either.