moonslav59

Or, WAR/gm since WAR rewards those who play more than others, but we still have to realize the sample size is small.

Post season sample sizes are usually too small to weigh heavily on a player's value. When they do become significant after many post seasons, one should also factor in how spread out most of the sample sizes are. Yes, they should count, but I feel only proportionate to the sample size.

Got that right.

To me, not even close to not even close.

This whole "over-valued" prospect thing is unfounded. We'll never know one way or another, but I'm convinced he'd have traded several top prospects that next winter, if he was given another year. He also did trade some prospects.

Not even close.

Nothing to do with firing Cora.

Bloom won't fire the best Sox manager in history over this. (Okay,arguably second best.)

I can see AGon, Tex and Kemp being red, but Cano's is so-so and/or pending. Stanton has 8 years left. You may think he will be red, but he has to be, at worst, pending. Machado & Harper have to be pending since they just finished year 1. ARod's deals were NOT red. No way. (ARod3, yes, but that wasn't a 7+ year deal.) I'll recatagorize things with those 3 changed to red. 11 Deals over $25M/yr x 7+ yrs 5 Good 4 Pending 2 Bad 17 Deals between $20M/yr to $25M/yr x 7+ yrs 4 Good 4 Pending 9 Bad Seems like the mega deals are better than the semi-mega deals. Combined (all $20+M) 9 Good 8 Pending 11 Bad Even these numbers do not indicate a horrible record for big signings. I'm thinking Altuve's and Votto's deals will end up being good, and if we assume all the other 6 pending end up being bad (Trout, Arenado, Machado, Harper, Stanton & Cano), the record would be: 11 Good 17 Bad That's about 60% bad & 40% good, which does not appear to be as bad as many make it out to be. If I had to vote on those 6 and their projections, I'd put Trout, Arenado and Cano as so-so, but maybe Cano could be bad, my totals would be 11 Good 3 so-so 14 bad That's only 50% bad.

Exactly. The Sox should not, and I believe will not plan on 1 inning from Pedey. If he plays, then so be it. We will not trade Chatham, Marco or Lin. I'm not sure if they seriously see Chavis as a long term 2B option, but in my opinion, his bat does not support him playing 1B, so maybe 2B is his best shot.

No. I want him only DH'ing with maybe a handful of games in the OF at NL parks.

7 of the 11 deals over $25M/yr x 7 are able to be judged. 5 Good: Kershaw, Scherzer, ARod1, Verlander, ARod2 2 Bad: Miggy & Price Of the 12 deals between $20-25M that can be judged, now, I find... 3 Good 3 S-So 6 Bad I'd say the idea that the vast majority of mega and mega long deals go bad is unfounded.

Yes, I meant to put price in red. (Fixed it.) One could argue Price is "pending."

The move certainly increases the odds. (I know you aren't going anywhere, but yes, if he gets hurt- it's all your fault!)

I edited out the shorter term contracts- just 7+ year contracts listed. Red= Bad Blue= Pending or good Black= so-so

When JD gets hurt playing 1B, will you be around to defend the move?

Or both, plus I'm terrified, but I know that doesn't count for jack.

My guess is Cora may have to serve a suspension. I'm thinking, how can the Astros not have known an ex-player would spill the beans at some point? If I was an ex-Astro and I was facing them in a game, I'd tell my team, anyway.

So, basically, the whole player budget up to the luxury tax is paid before they even to the gate receipts and TV revenue.

He'll get hurt in ST'ing just trying to squat for a low throw. (I'm not joking, here.)

You'll have to ask Gulianni.

You think we could get Margot and 2 prospects (no Quantrill) for Betts?

This means we should trade JD, assuming the impossible happens and Pedey DHs 80+ games. JD should not play defense- anywhere but in NL parks.

It's all a hoax and a witch hunt! (Repeat 17, 000 times.)

Who gets the money if sold at Fenway Park?