Jump to content
Talk Sox
  • Create Account

moonslav59

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    105,216

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    134

 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 Pick Tracker

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by moonslav59

  1. moonslav59
    That's how I see it. Sure, if our batters had a better approach, we'd likely have scored more, but probably not enough. We'll never know. It's like the chicken and egg argument.
  2. moonslav59
    The pitchers that can go 6-7 cost $30M.
  3. moonslav59
    Yes. 2-3 slots to fill, but not the luxury of signing 4-7 pitchers in hopes that 3 stick. Sure, we can sign several minor league contract deals, but we need solid pitching. I'd prefer 2 starters (1 could be ERod) and 1-2 RP'ers, but if we move Whitlock or Houck to starter, we'd reverse those numbers. I do think 90% of our winter budget should go towards pitching.
  4. moonslav59
    I'm fine with Whitlock as a starter and think he'd be better than Houck. I also think Houck could make a great closer. He reminds me of Papelbon. I'd rather keep both where they have proven they can do very very well. No fence. Just a consistent opinion.
  5. moonslav59
    3-way for a pitcher or a a pitching prospect. I doubt we trade Bogey. We might sign Baez and wait to the deadline, too.
  6. moonslav59
    I'm not watching another pitch, this year.
  7. moonslav59
    We were doing fine before the light bulb, too, and those damn steam engines!
  8. moonslav59
    I was going to say something very similar, and while the A's are no push-overs, they will never spend like the Astros.
  9. moonslav59
    Okay, maybe "genius" and "brilliant" might be a poor choice of words or exaggerations by some (or different views on what those words mean,) but your white flag comments are just as extreme on the other end of the spectrum.
  10. moonslav59
    Nope! It was the bats and not scoring first! That has been proven, already. sarcasm alert
  11. moonslav59
    We get your position. Most disagree. Your white flag hoisting cliche is getting old.
  12. moonslav59
    We did suck, but the other team does play a role in the outcome, too. Some of those balls we swung at were very nice breaking balls. Newsflash: many of the games we won, we swung at many balls in the dirt. That was not the only factor. It was probably not the deciding one, either. We dropped a fly ball that allowed that all important first run to score. Even the double play ball hit to Schwarber could have been an out at home- possibly no 2nd run. Ottavino sucked. Our bats sucked worst of all. I never said they didn't. BATS SUCKED!!!! Batters sucked!
  13. moonslav59
    Not another team nor another position.
  14. moonslav59
    I'm not absolving our offense. It sucked. My point was that while it certainly is better to score first, it was not essential we do so, and you twist that to say I absolved our offense. I stick to my point: on game threads, I don't think anyone was as negative and defeatist as you. You ended up finally be right. We were defeated. We failed to score first. You can pat yourself on your own back, now.
  15. moonslav59
    Just stop. I stopped going to the game threads mainly because of you and your obsessive bitching and moaning and defeatism. Just go back and look. The September Yankee sweep, the O's series, the first game loss to TB. You gave up on this team long ago, and kept trying to get everyone to follow you into the darkness. Well, you finally got to say, "I told you so," but the worst part is, you think you've been vindicated by us not scoring first and losing 3 in a row. I think otherwise. I think you were wrong back then, and still wrong, now. We proved we were fighters and lasted way longer than you thought they would. The stros were missing 2of their best starters and so we the Rays. So what? The guys they put out there were pitching great. I don't care what their names are. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see this guys pitches were unhitable.
  16. moonslav59
    The Betts trade ain't looking so bad, now either, especially when you figure in the players he signed with the saved money from Betts and Price. Even the little waiver pick-ups like Arroyo worked out okay.
  17. moonslav59
    Gloss over the fact that you've been predicting doom & gloom since as far back as I can remember. You must be glad you finally found the nuts inside the broken clock.
  18. moonslav59
    I learned everything from you, Max, Bell, Kimmi, notin and others.
  19. moonslav59
    I think we just might trade Bogey- maybe Vaz, too. Only ERod & JD are players that may need to be replaced in kind, but then again, both might be back. I don't expect Bloom to find another Whitlock, but another Kike, Renfroe and Pivetta would be nice. It will be interesting to see if he goes larger than $15M on a FA. That's new territory, for him.
  20. moonslav59
    "I told you?" Please! You've been calling doomsday for as long as I remember. You finally got it right the last 3 games after being wrong for months, and you gloat. Nice try.
  21. moonslav59
    That happens when all the choice options get worse and worse.
  22. moonslav59
    Someone needs to put an end to the Astros success. I'm not just talking the next series.
  23. moonslav59
    It was really enjoyable watching the home plate ump make so many great calls, tonight. I never noticed this fascinating aspect of the game. It was so much more fun than paying attention to the players. Thanks for the heads up.
  24. moonslav59
    Correct. It should be a fun winter. I look forward to some good back and forths. Don't be so harsh on our future. Just about all of our departing players are not key players.
  25. moonslav59
    The Dodgers will give them Heimlich.
×
×
  • Create New...