User Name

But he can't be excused for the real blunder (Panda) since it happened under his watch. I understand and acknowledge that he lacked autonomy, as I pointed to iortiz, who is basking in his extremist glory, as usual. However, the buck has to stop somewhere. In a real life job, if I allow my boss to make an unsound investment, and don't make my voice hearrd on my disagreement, I will shoulder a big part of the blame. We all know Epstein did not want Crawford, but we can't say the same aboout Cherington and Panda, so for all intents and purposes, it's his signing. The Lester trade was also flat-out terrible, in the end. Lowballing him afterwards was just a cherry in the stupid cake. I understand that they may not have wanted him back, but the handling of those negotiations was terrible.

Unlike you, however, I can actually apply a modicum of objectivity to my arguments, and I can also avoid making stuff up, two traits you are invited to imitate.

It's not speculation. DD literally had a clause in his contract built in that gives him autonomy in regards to baseball ops, and it was very public and discussed in this very forum. They don't just make clauses like that up for no reason. DD was telling the owners he wouldn't take the job if he was going to be dealing with the same BS that Ben (and to a lesser extent, Epstein) was. If it quacks like a duck, and walks like a duck.....

This is the crux of the entire argument.

We are abundantly clear on what your position is.

Can't give Ben credit for all of the good moves (not trading Bogaerts or Mookie, Hanley who will end up being awesome, Koji, etc) while giving him a pass for all of the blunders (Panda,Castillo, etc). You can't have it both ways.

It's not a panic move if you literally don't have a choice. Panda was too out of shape to play the position both from a production and a health standpoint. Come join the rest of us in reality.

Neither do you, and we're back at square one. To put another way: Catcher is the "safest" route to MLB, because the offensive requirements are lower and most players don't want to play C, but it's not the "fastest" route, because it takes the most preparation time out of any position in the baseball, and this a demonstrable fact. If you check out the average time for an amateur prospect to reach the Majors, catchers take the longest time.

Hanley is my spirit animal.

So, makes all of the sense in the world. The Panda move made sense, the Swihart move made sense, and Castillo still looks like a deer in headlights so demoting him to get regular playing makes sense. What exactly are you complaining about Kimmi?

I know some "buscones" who scout talent for a living. I've heard the opposite of what you say several times. Teams usually didn't go to the amateur ranks looking to draft catchers. They'd usually draft a big, stocky kid that played 3B and moved him to catcher if he had a good arm and was smart enough. However, this is only true for players in the Latin American ranks, so I don't know what philosophy teams use(d) for finding catchers up in the states.

They reek of "putting the best possible team forward". You keep talking about them having no real considerations for long term implications, and that is silly at best, pedantic at worst. Are you going to tell me you know better about the long-term outlook and health of this franchise than the FO? The worst thing that can happen to them is interest in the product growing stale, because then you screw with revenue projections, and as screwed as this team budget-wise (because of their own mistakes mind you), the worst thing they can do is putting a crappy team forward because they don't want to hurt people's feelings. You were dead wrong about giving Panda a chance, since he clearly can't physically handle the rigors of playing everyday, and Castillo needs to clear his head in a low-pressure environment. The Swihart demotion is justified because he clearly needs work defensively. There is sound logic to literally every move they have made except the ones (like signing Panda) you keep defending. Let them put the best team forward. It's the best they can do for the long-term outlook of the franchise.

Incorrect. Catcher is the position that needs the most reps and seasoning before a player makes it to the Show. If your theory was correct, Bryce Harper would still be catching.

Why do you keep saying this? It's obviously false, and a mischaracterization of what other people say. It riles you up when people put words in your mouth, so stop doing it to others. No one has said they dislike Sandoval because he's fat. He's disliked/hated because he sucks, and he sucks because he's out of shape. If he was playing well, no one would give a s*** about the fact that he's fat.

Lifelong Lakers fan here, but I have a weird relationship with the Lakers, just like I do with the Pats. Love the Pats and Lakers, hate Brady, dislike Kobe.

That's a bunch of hogwash. Why would his stock take a hit in a relatively small sample when the rest of the league knows he's not a finished product? Do you think you know better than the Red Sox or leagues' talent evaluators?

The fact that he's 24 means jack in this conversation. He's a recent catcher convert with little in the way of reps at the position. You have said before in your defense of Gary Sanchez and Jesus Montero that developing catchers takes times and reps. Be consistent.

That is a load of ********. Swihart barely has any development time at the C position. He needs reps, but he's shown nothing about his long-term defensive outlooks. If he was a Yankees prospect, you 'd be gushing about what a great future outlook he has.

Farrell pisses me off so much. Porcello was clearly laboring in the 6th.

I am your friend on FB.....

Like O'B and RemDawg, do not like O'B and Eck.

We should give you whatever part of Sandoval's salary he hasn't spent on food.

Lucky there.

^^^

You can't keep giving these offense second chances. Jays D doing RA Dickey no favors.