Jump to content
Talk Sox
  • Create Account

User Name

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    18,192

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Profiles

Boston Red Sox Videos

2026 Boston Red Sox Top Prospects Ranking

Boston Red Sox Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

Guides & Resources

2025 Boston Red Sox Draft Pick Tracker

News

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by User Name

  1. User Name
    Fred, can we get a couple of posts from ya that aren't rants? Maybe something about how nice the weather is?
  2. User Name
    But there's the caveat of positional scarcity. Napoli is the best C in a thin class, and he can actually hit out of that position, which is a valuable commodity. Hamilton has all of his baggage, plus a relatively deep OF class. There will be a significant difference, the question is how significant, because on a 30 mill difference with the same amount of years, i go Hamilton. Then again, it's just an opinion.
  3. User Name
    Wouldn't that apply to Napoli as well then? It goes both ways, otherwise the premise is flawed.
  4. User Name
    I think Cabrera deserved it on the strength of his down-the-stretch numbers and the positional change. At first base, where he has much better defense, his WAR number would have been significantly higher. I'm willing to bet he was rewarded by the "value" of his sacrifice.
  5. User Name
    Well i figure otherwise. I think Texas' stance on him is an indicator of the type of contract he should be getting. The "stupid GM" factor could be at play here, but the guy has too many demons chasing him.
  6. User Name
    But how much cheaper is Napoli going to be? Also, there's the fact that Napoli has only had one really good year. There's something to be said for expected value, and Napoli's been a year-in, year-out wild card production wise. Now, don't take this as me saying i wouldn't want Napoli with his big power, OBP numbers and positional flexibility. I'm saying that between the two of them, without a massive difference in money , i would take Hamilton. In reality, i would take both on shorter deals. A lineup of: Cf Ellsbury 2B Pedroia Lf Hamilton 1B Napoli Dh Ortiz 3b Middlebrooks Rf Kalish (or insert OF here) C Lavarnway Ss Ciriaco/Iglesias Is not too shabby. But that's probably not going to happen and they'll sign neither of them.
  7. User Name
    So Hamilton's getting 100 mill more than Napoli? Doubtful.
  8. User Name
    Lots of "what ifs" regarding Napoli and his production, but not a lot of them regarding Hamilton, other than health. Napoli's not in the same class offensively as Hamilton regardless of his monster 2011. He's a complimentary piece (albeit a very nice one), not a guy you build a lineup around. In an ideal world, the Sox get both on shorter term deals.
  9. User Name
    By verbal protection, do you mean contract language a la JD Drew? And do you think there's a way to protect Hamilton from the Boston media monster? Because if there isn't, he's not a fit.
  10. User Name
    Or you could sign players who will produce similar results on one year deals that are a bit more expensive and won't suck/get injured, like Kuroda and a guy like Thome, who is older, but has outproduced Hafner by the mile and could probably be talked out of retiring.
  11. User Name
    Too many ifs, which is ironic coming from the guy who hates "ifs" on his team.
  12. User Name
    And taking back two huge back-loaded contracts, getting yet another batch of injury-prone players and bloating payroll. Exactly what the Red Sox need right now.
  13. User Name
    How do Hafner and Oswalt make sense for the Yankees? They're both coming off awful seasons and significant injuries.
  14. User Name
    Stop making sense. The whiners with the inflated sense of entitlement hate it when you make sense.
  15. User Name
    Or even worse, Fenway. It's murderland for homer-prone lefties.
  16. User Name
    Both? That's close to impossible.
  17. User Name
    No he's not. Pena can actually get on base.
  18. User Name
    Why do you keep sounding the Papelbon horn? That contract is still an atrocity. The Sox' real mistake was not being smart enough to sign a better short-term option like Nathan, who worked out pretty well for Texas.
  19. User Name
    Apparently i am smarter than that, because it seems to me that A) Even though he was so bad last year, Marmol still has electric stuff and is a player the Angels were actually targeting, do we know better than them here at TalkSox? B ) They were pretty desperate to get rid of Haren, but not desperate enough to give him away as a dump, and they had plenty of opportunities to do that. I think you're smart enough to know that a lot of these assumptions simply don't make any sense.
  20. User Name
    The bolded parts are massive speculation. And also, Marmol was reportedly willing to waive his no-trade. Now think about it, the Cubs pulled the "horrible" Marmol back and the trade didn't go through. Doesn't that raise some red flags?
  21. User Name
    If they were "giving him away" as you say, then why is he a free agent? Surely someone would have taken him for a minor piece if that was the case. The only fact here is that we don't know why no one picked him up.
  22. User Name
    How do you know this? And how does it make sense? The Angels clearly wanted something back for Haren.
  23. User Name
    What i don't understand is why people automatically assume the GM "failed" here. How do we know the Angels weren't asking for too much or it became apparent that Haren was going to become a FA? Even worse, how do we know if, upon doing a complete checkup on him, the Sox weren't willing to give up a player like Bard for him. Too many smart people here making a lot of thoroughly unrealistic assumptions.
  24. User Name
    Which seems to have become an ongoing trend the last couple of years.
  25. User Name
    They're trying to trade Haren too in order to make room for Greinke, reports say.
×
×
  • Create New...