drewski6

There were people on boston.com who wanted to ditch ortiz in 2008 , declaring him washed up...And moonslav made a famous "rumors of papi's decline have been greatly exaggerated" post and it was a moonslav post, so of course it stuck around for like 3 years and got up to 10k posts and might still be going if BDC didnt kick us out. Im recent here, becasue i went to another place first because i wanted a single sign-on with my basketball foruming But that place didnt have enough activity, and pumpsie eventually shut it down and I tried to get in here for awhile before i was finally let in. I just kept trying to create account and it kept telling me that it was in queue/consideration and I just dont think anybody was checking it. But then something happened here, with the takeover and I got right in. So ty for the changes here whomever was behind it. Wonder if RKARP is here somewhere. RKARP you here?

By being the mets They also traded daryl strawberry and adam sandlers thanksgiving song frames it as an unbelievable decision.

It could have been someone different than Chris Carter also, like Jeff Bailey or Place or another prospect, but the point is that we've heard all the "younger is better and its all about WAR / dollar spent and value value value" arguments before. And the dont sign players over 30 and dont trade for them. And always be looking 5 years down the road. You know what I say? When you are always dreaming about tomorrow, tomorrow never comes. Im philosophical

his name was burritoT and he was on boston.com forums.

I assume "flat fastball" if meant as a positive is the new way of saying "fastball with good carry" Throws from the OF can have good carry too, because they are more straight line than "arc'ing throws" so maybe they are trying to be nuanced and thats why they wont just say "good carry" (like they use to) Still, if someone told me a fastball has good carry, I think I would be able to figure out they werent talking about Raul Mondesi gunning dudes down at the plate from RF. And would be talking about the "riser" You are right, they just have to keep the terms fresh to feel smart. Because before it was a "fastball with good carry" it was a "rising fastball" And I wonder who the first nerd who was like "actually, the pitch isnt rising, it just looks that way because our eyes are trained to expect a certain level of drop that isnt there, so you are technically incorrect when you call it a rising fastball. Instead call it a fastball with good carry" ANd everyone is looking at the nerd like "yeah, we know"

wish we were as good at fixing the top of the 40 man as we are the bottom, but hey, marginal improvements are still improvements i guess. Death by 1000 paper cuts, is what they called the bloom years. But we're looking for something to be positive about.

Not the OF we got for Vaughn is a win for me. They were like this dude was just picked in the 8th round of the last draft, is likely to stick in CF, super athletic, and has raw power but needs to better his hit tool to fully capitalize on teh raw power. Felt like a good deal for Vaughn Grissom who i expected to get waived/claimed. And now we've also repurposed the 40 man roster spot without parting with the aforementioned acquired OF'er Thats some good work.

I assume that by fastball they mean the ball doesnt drop like our eyes expect it to and therefore it creates an illusion to the batter that its rising. Im sure youve been in there against one. They actually do look like they are rising! Thats not just an expression. My only thing is this - they use to call that "good carry" a term Im sure youve heard. Thats what it mean. It stays up, doesnt have the usual arc, and gives the illusion that its rising. Not sure why the term change.

Youre not bad at it mr: "rumors of papi's decline have been greatly exaggerated" When Ortiz had a relatively rough 2008/2009 (for his standards) and the youth worshippers wanted to kick him to the curb to make room for this Chris Carter (I think theres been a few) https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/c/cartech01.shtml And we heard all the "would you rather have a player in his 30s declining and making big money or a player in his 20s making min wage" and all those other WAR per dollars arguments then too (jokers were trying to attach a prospect to papi just so someone would take his "bad contract" when he still had 5 HOF years left). Some of us remember

oh no, we suck again

that would be a salvage.

Personally, I still think Bregman gets above 155m.

I think he thinks bregmans market wont warrant a comparable contract to alonso (his opinion , not mine) I thought alonso was getting 6 and was wrong, but I do think bregman is getting at least 140. He didnt opt out to get a worse deal.

If we turned Vaughn Grissom into that CF who was jsut picked 8th round with a surprisingly sexy write-up AND a decent reliever* with the vacated 40 man roster spot, thats good work *Assuming the of'er isnt the return for the reliever

hallelujah, Pharoahe Monch'll do ya Maintain the same frame of mind, screw ya Get the picture, sit ya, seat ya, greet ya with scriptures I'm equipped to rip ya, reach ya Pharoahe and Mos is verbal osmosis Coast to coast, we boast to be the most explosive here Ferocious, the lyrical prognosis The dosage is leavin' you mentally unfocused here MCs just come on 'round You're the next contestants on Catch a Beat Down

You are making a fine case against polanco. My only point has alwasy been that younger and cheaper isnt always better. Story was better in 2025 than Mayer was, and that would not have changed if Mayer made it through the season. There is something to be said for having been there before. There is something to be said for maturity and professionalism. As I hvae suspected for a little while, we are more talking past each other than disagreeing. I am not , at all, trying to make a case specific to Polanco. I would be disappointed with Polanco. My point is that some people, maybe not necessarily you, but some people poo-poo every potential player acquisition north of 30, and Im just saying to those people pump the breaks on that. There are plenty of 31,32,33 yr olds that are still helping their teams win. They dont give the championship to the youngest team. If you build your team around guys under 25, chances are, you are not a championship team. Im speaking more generally. I dont even really like Jorge Polanco. I liked Placido Polanco more. But I am sad about Alonso.

Im not as interested in polanco as you are giving me credit for, i am more making the case that generally speaking guys who are around 32 in age tend to help their teams more than guys who are around 23 in age.

At least we have this guy ^

hahaha, nice

Not matching 5 yrs / 155 when we were his first desired designation is pretty unforgiveable. Im legit sad.

my apologies, mvp. I thought you were being cynical. Didnt realize it had happened. I was on a work call

wait, did i miss something.

You are the one who taught me not to let the bloom years jade me on the breslow years. Maybe ill give you your line right back to you Yes, bloom would let orioles outbid him for alonso. But breslow and his recent glow up (yes, hes having one, and it started when cora gave him the voice of support vs early breslow when him and cora were passive aggressive digging at each other through the media)....Breslow gives polar bear the sixth year.....and my prediction those of us who are anti six years for polar bear will find themselves surprised that they are happy

to me: its not going to be 2 bats = 80% confidence (or greater) its NOT goin to be 2 bats = 90% confidence (or greater) the capitalization of not matters to me, and its where you lose me. I think the chance that we get a big bat and a second bat that is not hoskins level is about 60% unless you are putting paredes and that tier in the hoskins tier, i dont think thats fair though. hoskins finished 2025 in AAA

You really cant see Alonso and Paredes? You are this confident? To put NOT in caps?