Red Mosquito

Coach wrote:

elliseamos wrote:

cutuphalfdead wrote:The Rays are retarded.

the sox did just what i was hoping they'd do, which is that they set the market.

if price is traded first, then lester (and lackey) wouldn't be worth what they were. the uncertainty of whether price would be moved inflated the sox two pitchers.

THIS.

Also, if you judge Cherington just based on today, he gets a solid A. Now....don't get me started about failing to re-sign Lester...I just don't understand that logic. I'm thinking something in the 120-30 range would have gotten it done in Spring Training.

Who was the last Red Sox to actually enter free agency for real and then resign with the team? 'Tek?

Varitek is the only one, I think. Lowell in 08? I dont count Papi, as theres really no market for him and they know it.

Chris_H_2 wrote:Can someone tell me (1) if the Phillies have a plan, and (2) if they do, what that plan is?

Imbeciles . . .

1) They do have a plan
2) The plan is to compete for a playoff spot

The Phillies have hands down the most incompetent front office in the majors, and easily one of the worst I've ever seen. They have no concept of player valuation whatsoever. The team is going to be a complete mess for a long time.

philpritchard wrote:

Chris_H_2 wrote:Can someone tell me (1) if the Phillies have a plan, and (2) if they do, what that plan is?

Imbeciles . . .

1) They do have a plan
2) The plan is to compete for a playoff spot

The Phillies have hands down the most incompetent front office in the majors, and easily one of the worst I've ever seen. They have no concept of player valuation whatsoever. The team is going to be a complete mess for a long time.

Is their current front office the same one that built that winning team originally? If so, it's kind of weird. The last couple of years they have made some bizarre decisions. Was Gillick the one that built it, and then Amaro took over later?

numbers wrote:

philpritchard wrote:

Chris_H_2 wrote:Can someone tell me (1) if the Phillies have a plan, and (2) if they do, what that plan is?

Imbeciles . . .

1) They do have a plan
2) The plan is to compete for a playoff spot

The Phillies have hands down the most incompetent front office in the majors, and easily one of the worst I've ever seen. They have no concept of player valuation whatsoever. The team is going to be a complete mess for a long time.

Is their current front office the same one that built that winning team originally? If so, it's kind of weird. The last couple of years they have made some bizarre decisions. Was Gillick the one that built it, and then Amaro took over later?

I had to look it up, but it's kind of funny; Gillick was the GM until 2008. They won the World Series, he retired, and Amaro took over. Amaro is the worst GM in the league, and I don't think there are really any other contenders.

philpritchard wrote:

numbers wrote:

philpritchard wrote:

Chris_H_2 wrote:Can someone tell me (1) if the Phillies have a plan, and (2) if they do, what that plan is?

Imbeciles . . .

1) They do have a plan
2) The plan is to compete for a playoff spot

The Phillies have hands down the most incompetent front office in the majors, and easily one of the worst I've ever seen. They have no concept of player valuation whatsoever. The team is going to be a complete mess for a long time.

Is their current front office the same one that built that winning team originally? If so, it's kind of weird. The last couple of years they have made some bizarre decisions. Was Gillick the one that built it, and then Amaro took over later?

I had to look it up, but it's kind of funny; Gillick was the GM until 2008. They won the World Series, he retired, and Amaro took over. Amaro is the worst GM in the league, and I don't think there are really any other contenders.

Word is that he was asking for teams' top 2 prospects . . . for Cliff Lee . . . and refusing to assume any of his salary.

philpritchard wrote:

numbers wrote:

philpritchard wrote:

Chris_H_2 wrote:Can someone tell me (1) if the Phillies have a plan, and (2) if they do, what that plan is?

Imbeciles . . .

1) They do have a plan
2) The plan is to compete for a playoff spot

The Phillies have hands down the most incompetent front office in the majors, and easily one of the worst I've ever seen. They have no concept of player valuation whatsoever. The team is going to be a complete mess for a long time.

Is their current front office the same one that built that winning team originally? If so, it's kind of weird. The last couple of years they have made some bizarre decisions. Was Gillick the one that built it, and then Amaro took over later?

I had to look it up, but it's kind of funny; Gillick was the GM until 2008. They won the World Series, he retired, and Amaro took over. Amaro is the worst GM in the league, and I don't think there are really any other contenders.

Yeah, he's gotta be.

This is great . . .

Chris_H_2 wrote:

philpritchard wrote:

numbers wrote:

philpritchard wrote:

Chris_H_2 wrote:Can someone tell me (1) if the Phillies have a plan, and (2) if they do, what that plan is?

Imbeciles . . .

1) They do have a plan
2) The plan is to compete for a playoff spot

The Phillies have hands down the most incompetent front office in the majors, and easily one of the worst I've ever seen. They have no concept of player valuation whatsoever. The team is going to be a complete mess for a long time.

Is their current front office the same one that built that winning team originally? If so, it's kind of weird. The last couple of years they have made some bizarre decisions. Was Gillick the one that built it, and then Amaro took over later?

I had to look it up, but it's kind of funny; Gillick was the GM until 2008. They won the World Series, he retired, and Amaro took over. Amaro is the worst GM in the league, and I don't think there are really any other contenders.

Word is that he was asking for teams' top 2 prospects . . . for Cliff Lee . . . and refusing to assume any of his salary.

I always find it funny when you hear about the asking price for players because it always starts at such a ridiculous high. It's just part of the process, so it's normally no big deal. With the Phillies, I can't help but believe Amaro genuinely believes that's the value of the player and that's the return he expects to get. He was apparently asking for the top three prospects from the Dodgers for Hamels, and the Dodgers top three prospects are amazing.

Dodgers have that little lefty in A ball who is killing it and he is 17!!!!!

Chris_H_2 wrote:This is great . . .

.

Welp. Thats pretty cool.

@SkitchP wrote:Welp. Thats pretty cool.

detroit has to be considered the run-away winners from yesterday. they subtract austin jackson to get david price?!

the more i look at it, the more i think they're the favorite.

elliseamos wrote:

@SkitchP wrote:Welp. Thats pretty cool.

detroit has to be considered the run-away winners from yesterday. they subtract austin jackson to get david price?!

the more i look at it, the more i think they're the favorite.

It's scary to the level that Prospect fetish has gone. At the beginning of the season the prospect Adames was barely in the top 10 of the Tigers prospect list... and half the folks are now upset about the deal because he was included, despite Dombrowski's uncanny ability to unload prospects that never amount to much. Doesn't mean Adames won''t be any good, but come on.

"Prospects" are valued as much for the amount of years of team control (particularly when you can sign them to long-term deals at such young ages if they pan out at below- or at-market rates) as they are for talent. It's not surprising why gm's covet them so much now. If you have huge payrolls with owners who are on death's door and who want to win NOW, they're not valued as much; but that's certainly the exception, not the rule.

@SkitchP wrote:

elliseamos wrote:

@SkitchP wrote:Welp. Thats pretty cool.

detroit has to be considered the run-away winners from yesterday. they subtract austin jackson to get david price?!

the more i look at it, the more i think they're the favorite.

It's scary to the level that Prospect fetish has gone. At the beginning of the season the prospect Adames was barely in the top 10 of the Tigers prospect list... and half the folks are now upset about the deal because he was included, despite Dombrowski's uncanny ability to unload prospects that never amount to much. Doesn't mean Adames won''t be any good, but come on.

Seriously. Who was the last guy Detroit traded that actually turned out to have a good career? Andrew Miller? And it took him two teams and a change in roles to actually do it.

Chris_H_2 wrote:"Prospects" are valued as much for the amount of years of team control (particularly when you can sign them to long-term deals at such young ages if they pan out at below- or at-market rates) as they are for talent. It's not surprising why gm's covet them so much now. If you have huge payrolls with owners who are on death's door and who want to win NOW, they're not valued as much; but that's certainly the exception, not the rule.

Im not talking about the GM's coveting. Im talking about the fans prospect fetish.

Joesanity wrote:

@SkitchP wrote:

elliseamos wrote:

@SkitchP wrote:Welp. Thats pretty cool.

detroit has to be considered the run-away winners from yesterday. they subtract austin jackson to get david price?!

the more i look at it, the more i think they're the favorite.

It's scary to the level that Prospect fetish has gone. At the beginning of the season the prospect Adames was barely in the top 10 of the Tigers prospect list... and half the folks are now upset about the deal because he was included, despite Dombrowski's uncanny ability to unload prospects that never amount to much. Doesn't mean Adames won''t be any good, but come on.

Seriously. Who was the last guy Detroit traded that actually turned out to have a good career? Andrew Miller? And it took him two teams and a change in roles to actually do it.

Jurrgens had a couple of good seasons.

John Smoltz was a pretty good player that Detroit traded. I believe for Doyle Alexander.


Smoltz had one or two good years.

Electromatic wrote:John Smoltz was a pretty good player that Detroit traded. I believe for Doyle Alexander.


Smoltz had one or two good years.

i dunno, Electro, his time with the red sox was brutal.

Electromatic wrote:John Smoltz was a pretty good player that Detroit traded. I believe for Doyle Alexander.


Smoltz had one or two good years.

http://www.blessyouboys.com/2011/7/19/2 ... moltzs-law