cp176
-
Posts
10,796 -
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
2026 Boston Red Sox Draft Tracker: Picks & Bonuses
Forums
Blogs
Events
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by cp176
-
think I made a little posting error here Nick - meant for my friend Slasher.
-
The only thing that this will get you Slasher is another atta boy - you are my hero - post of the day comment. lol
-
When that event happened, i was as disappointed probably as much as I could have been. I could not believe it but I not for one minute ever game any blame to Billy Buck. I wish that he had made it but if not for him, much like I feel about Mookie we would not have even been in that game. he had had a hell of a season.
-
Slasher - would the Sox have won in '86 if Stapleton had replaced Billy Buck? It certainly would have been the right move to make i think, but no one knows whether or not we would have won.
-
I cannot answer the unanswerable question Slash. Who knows - As for the Mookie Nomar controversy, as good as Nomar was in his prime, I'm still taking Mookie. Better in every facet of the game. it is all good though. We are fortunate to have seen them both.
-
Hey - I see that CLIFF word right there.
-
I loved the young Nomar and at the plate what wasn't there to love. he came along when we needed a star. Honestly though, I never saw him as a great fielder. he could get to balls and often times made the what looked to be impossible play. The but is that for me, it seemed like the routine groundball seemed to cause him more trouble than it should have. Like Cabrerra or not he gave us consistent play at the ss position. I still think that comparing Nomar to Mookie is nuts. In all aspects of the game Mookie seems to be ahead of him. Betts is on a different level not to mention that he still has youth on his side.
-
Nomar wasn't
-
you beat me to the punch. I agree with you . Betts may be traded for sure but he could be forever seen as the second most important one to get away. He could be that good. Obviously the Babe being number 1.
-
Personal opinion of course once again but I don't think the two players really are comparable regardless of what the stats show. Nomar was one helluva baseball player for sure not so much as he aged. Betts very well might be one of the very best we have seen in Boston. he is young and has started a Hall of fame like career. In my mind there is a big difference between the two. Nomar was very very good when he was young and healthy, Betts is arguably the second best player in the game today at a pretty young age. After Mike Trout, i'm guessing that Mookie is the next guy up.
-
Hands of stone -
-
very very nice job
-
I'm futuristic!!! Don't look back on what has been, look ahead to what might be! (hmm think I remember where that came from - just kidding actually I do)
-
I think that you are giving Nomar too much credit!
-
Now that does bring back some memories. Gary Gieger (who I bet you never heard of) to Fred Lynn I think is closer.
-
hmm let see - Nomar is to Mookie as ______________ would be too ______________. You get to fill in the blanks.
-
Sucks he plays for the Angels doesn't it.
-
What are you saying notin? Come on now, I don't remember mentioning the Clemens trade. Also are you trying to imply that I don't realize that Betts has one more year to go? You have absolutely no idea what my logic is. Oh and thanks for putting words in my mouth which I did not intend to say. What I said was that trading away Betts for next to nothing in return, without making a really strong effort to sign him, will not be looked upon favorably by many fans no matter how it is spun. They (we) do not see things the way you and a couple of other posters see see things. Just a different perspective than yours.
-
I was concerned about losing Moncada and sort of a little concerned with losing Kopech but getting Chris Sale was worth it and would have been silly not to make the trade. As for everyone of those other players lost - ho hum. I will admit though that I was fond of Margot and Dubon. I absolutely believe that it is time to look ahead and those who continually keep expressing negative feelings about DD have something else going on. What it is, I don't know. Maybe it is a constant need to feel right when there likely is no right or wrong. It strikes me as strange. The majority of successful people that I know tend to look ahead and not backward. I'm all in on our new GM but he won't get any free pass from most fans regardless of what he was left with. It is about him now and not our former GM. From all reports it looks like the right guy could have been hired. Let's see how he does.
-
You tickle me. Now - trading away a possible generational talent for next to nothing could hurt this franchise much more than any trades made yesteryear by whoever the GM was.
-
You speak my language!!!
-
I hardly doubt that a decision to keep Betts will be dictated by what the fans want or expect. The decision to keep Mookie I think is likely to be made on the fact that shy of Trout he may be the best player in the game for years to come. Signing Mookie long term would be a long way from even resembling a "splashy" move which has been suggested. Giving away a generational talent for next to nothing would be hard to take and I doubt that any amount of spin suggesting that it helps out our farm is going to go over very well.
-
notin - seriously now this has nothing to do with a discussion about whatever DD did or did not do. We all know how you feel about DD. it is your right to feel that way but it isn't part of this discussion. There must be a thread somewhere that continues to beat up on a past GM don't you think. Personally I'm operating in the here and now. If Mookie is traded and you want to blame it on Dave Dombrowski well that's nice but once again the average fan likely will already have forgotten the past GM's name. He probably does not care about this.
-
I had a fairly good idea that this might revert back to the pitcher's injuries this year being foreseeable or not. I understand that I tend to look at things differently than you do. It would be nice to think that John Henry took into consideration the potential injury prospects of the players that he agreed to pay for. I get what is being said but I really don't think that it has much to do with whether or not trading Betts for low budget potential makes any sense. If it is all about staying below a certain tax level, ok fine, but I tend to think that the effect it will have on that regular old fan will be painful. In my estimation, it becomes an issue of what we might get in return for trading a player who years from now, many might wish that we had paid for.
-
Hopefully no one anywhere would disagree with your statement here. Understand also though that I am one of those fans who truly believes that if our pitchers had remained healthy this year we would not be having this discussion. it was a gamble taken that didn't work out. It is possible that a trade involving Mookie might work out as well but I think that if the return brought prospects not major league ready, it could impact the fan base for many years. We are talking Boston here. If trading Mookie brought great results in 3 or 4 years, i just don't think that it would be viewed in the same way that it would be in select small market areas where a team has rarely competed and never won.