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
    The problem is that because of the success seen by the Sox in the Mid-00's, they deemed it a good idea to start drafting high-upside HS talent thinking that the run of success was sustainable for a couple more years with what was the current core back then. The problem with that is that it takes a lot longer to develop, even though the payoff is usually much greater. That created a gap between the then current MLB-ready prospect crop and the next. Don't be surprised if, in two or three years, guys like Bogaert, Jacobs and Barnes become high-production MLB players, making this current discussion seem a bit silly. The Sox farm system is very strong on talent, the problem being that it's very bottom-heavy.
  2. User Name
    Re: Health. Wasn't complacency by the manager and a s***** conditioning team supposedly some of the main reasons for the Sox' recent health problems? Now that both of those have been replaced, why is it unrealistic to expect an improvement in player durability?
  3. User Name
    The only caveat to this argument is that the "Big Spenders" like the Red Sox and Yankees do not get outright first round draft picks on a yearly basis because of their Type-A FA acquisitions, or get them so low in the first round that most of the elite "can't miss" talent is already gone. I'm talking about guys like Lincecum, Price, Mauer, et al.
  4. User Name
  5. User Name
    I wasn't though. I would have taken Manny and his big mouth on a one-year deal over Ortiz for 14 mill.
  6. User Name
    The main difference is, back then, they couldn't just cut him because he made a lot of money. Now, if he acts up, he gets released. It's an apples to oranges comparison. Also, they couldn't get rid of Ortiz for Manny because he has to face a 50-game suspension before he can play. Disagree on Youk, and refer to the Ellsbury situation. If that's not affecting the clubhouse, then i don't know what is.
  7. User Name
    You know who has a bad attitude? Kevin Youkilis. But no one gave a s*** when he was OPS'ing over .950 a couple years ago. And just like that, no one would give a s*** about Manny's antics if they brought him back as long as he hit. And with the kind of contract he's going to get, one word out of his big mouth and off to the golf course.
  8. User Name
    And that translates to MLB production how?
  9. User Name
    When did Manny suck? He had a bad attitude, but he never stopped hitting.
  10. User Name
  11. User Name
    Because it interferes with the agenda of unfairly criticizing Theo Epstein.
  12. User Name
    Hey win red sox, you're fine in my book!
  13. User Name
    Correction: It's a prorated 1.5 million IF Cook is called up to the MLB team. Someone quote me so "The King" can see it.
  14. User Name
    Yeah he's been pretty ardently defending the team for some time. However, you raise some valid points. @rsf3 As Elktonnick said a couple posts back, this team played worse baseball as a whole than the sum of its parts. The changes of non-playing personnel should be enough to significantly improve the team even if they don't sign a solid #4.
  15. User Name
    I'm pretty sure he was being sarcastic bro.
  16. User Name
    I was very much against converting Bard into a starter if you may recall. But after the departure of Papelbon and the acquisition of Melancon/Bailey, i figure it's worth a shot. ORS made a great point. The Bard that flunked in 2007 and the Bard that's trying for the rotation in 2012 are not the same pitcher.
  17. User Name
    That's how RotoChamps and RotoWorld predict his performance, actually, but with 155 and 150 IP respectively. I think they don't take into consideration a possible move back to the 'pen though.
  18. User Name
  19. User Name
  20. User Name
  21. User Name
    No hard feelings. It be a message board. Also, i find you to be more knowledgeable about the pros and cons of statistical analysis than most. I love to have someone to argue with about it even if it's a round of jousting! LOL! Back to baseball: I know Padilla is a nut case, but he's throwing 96 in the Winter Leagues. Would you consider him better depth than Cook and Silva? He's healthy, and has BP experience.
  22. User Name
    Let me tell you that even though we get a little heated, i so enjoy arguing with you good sir.
  23. User Name
    I'm certain you also handle the word very well. You are also a master of the art. I would never argue with you on a subject in which you are clearly my superior. I bow out gracefully.
  24. User Name
    It's okay man, we've all been there (been wrong). No need to call names, get butthurt and lie.
  25. User Name
    I am certainly sure you do. Like perfectly.
×
×
  • Create New...