Mike & Mike- Red Sox-Angels

[HoustonGM]

The only reason I thought they might not pick it up was that they have too many outfielders. But you are right... ther will take the option... blows my whole theory up lol

If you have too many outfielders, the solution isn't to get rid of your best one

[Pavelb1]

Its not vested tho its jsut an option. let him walk or keep him and trade him. ill tell u this... us braves will take him. Francouer has already shown he can play center. more him there if we dont trade him away and Vlad for 1 year in right. Wren has 40 mill to work with and adding vlad is just 15. so that still leaves 25 million. I say offer smoltz about 3-5 mill to come back in the bullpen, offer hamptin 2 mill with about 7 mill in incentives. thats about 15 mil or so to offer to Lowe for 3 years. id be happy with that.

Diaz and Blanco can platoon in left, Francouer in center, vlad in left
Chipper, escobar, johnson/prado, kochman
with mccann at catcher. not terrible. Id like another thumper but wouldnt we all. if we can get francouer back to about 25 HR and we add vlad I think we can do alright.

Maybe this for a lineup
Blanco
escobar
chipper
vlad
mccann
johnson
francouer
kochman (can move to the #2 spot if he starts hitting again)

with
Lowe
Jurrjen
Hampton
campillo
james/reyes/glavine

closer smoltz
setup sorriano/gonzalez.

the question is...

what do you think the Angels would want?

would a young pitcher be enough??? James,Reyes, Campillo.

Did the Braves even try and work an extension with Tex? It's not like they're poor and man...that guy is ridiculously good.

[RedsoxRockies]

Did the Braves even try and work an extension with Tex? It's not like they're poor and man...that guy is ridiculously good.

They did, but it did not work out, so they traded him

[gRYFYN1]

They did, but it did not work out, so they traded him

I don't remeber if they made an offical offer, but he DID turn down 8/140 from the Rangers, Im not sure the Braves got past the "starting at 20m/season" point.

[TheNamelessPoet]

i forget what it was but it was about years and around 20-22 i THINK

[Swampdog]

Justanewguy, you said exactly what I quoted. It makes no more sense now than it did when you posted it. This is precisely the type of thing that we all hear from the media every day, and it is such a crock. "Built for the playoffs". Lol.

Yeah, the Red Sox sure pummelled the poor, weak hitting Angels. In games 2 and 4, you change the outcome of one pitch... ONE... and the Angels could have easily won both games. If that is the best of 7, the Angels could have easily won the next 3 games and won the series. If last years ALCS had it just happened to have been a best of 5 (like it was for years), instead of best of 7, then Boston... the team you claim is "built for the playoffs" would have been watching Cleveland in the WS. I didnt give one example of how silly your comment was, I gave three. And I only checked 2 years. If necessary, I could probably give a couple dozen examples of a weaker hitting team beating a better hitting team in a short series. No, wait, I could give hundreds of examples of that.

Again, you buy into this media nonsense which is just so ridiculous. The media seems to believe it has to explain everything...there is some special, secret reason why the Angels, or Cubs, or Brewers, etc, lost a game, or a series. The truth is that, in many, many instances, it is just a completely RANDOM series of events. It just happens. A team loses a short series because it didnt pitch especially well, or didnt get timely hits, or just didnt play good baseball. Thats it. Thats all there is to it.

From April to October, every year, there are teams that lose a short series to inferior teams solely because they didnt play good baseball. Thats IT. Thats all there is to it. Like many others, I get tired of hearing all these pseudo experts try to make more of it than it is. History has shown us that ANY team can beat any other in a short series. There is no mystery to it.

This "Built for the playoffs" is the latest baseball cliche. Dont forget to also say that the "postseason is a crapshoot", that Jamie Moyer is "crafty", any particular player will perform exceptionally well "in his contract year", that any particular statistic is or is not "sexy", that there "is no tomorrow", and that any team that scored a run without hitting a home run can "manufacture runs". Surely you can work these into your posts as well.


I didnt take your post out of context, not at all. A careful review will prove that. I simply disagree with what you said, and I proved you wrong. You arent the only one that makes comments that are untrue, and it really isnt your fault. You just believe the garbage you hear the media espouse and you repeat it. I suggest you educate yourself. Try doing a little research of your own sometime, or maybe read any of the 40 odd books authored by Bill James, or someone of his ilk.

[justanewguy]

Justanewguy, you said exactly what I quoted. It makes no more sense now than it did when you posted it. This is precisely the type of thing that we all hear from the media every day, and it is such a crock. "Built for the playoffs". Lol.

I said some other stuff too. Maybe you should... you know... try reading.

Yeah, the Red Sox sure pummelled the poor, weak hitting Angels. In games 2 and 4, you change the outcome of one pitch... ONE... and the Angels could have easily won both games.

Actually, I wasn't necessarily talking about that series. I was more or less talking about every series that you didn't manage to quote while arguing against a point I didn't even make.

If that is the best of 7, the Angels could have easily won the next 3 games and won the series.

What's the point of "what if?" Dude, seriously, what's the point? How about this... if it were a 21 game series, Boston could have hit like, 100 home runs. Dude, I totally just proved my own point. Boston could have hit more home runs than Anaheim in a 21 game series.

If last years ALCS had it just happened to have been a best of 5 (like it was for years), instead of best of 7, then Boston... the team you claim is "built for the playoffs" would have been watching Cleveland in the WS.

Uh... again... wtf is the point? I'm gradually coming to the conclusion that you're merely an aggressive idiot, as evidenced by your quickness to call me a homer for disagreeing that the Dodgers were a playoff weakling.

But seriously, what's the point in bringing up hypothetical situations that don't exist? I didn't even read whatever POINT you were actually trying to make, because it was set up by a fantasy situation.

I didnt give one example of how silly your comment was, I gave three. And I only checked 2 years. If necessary, I could probably give a couple dozen examples of a weaker hitting team beating a better hitting team in a short series. No, wait, I could give hundreds of examples of that.

Good for you. I'm sure you could give all sorts of examples of all sorts of things, many of which don't even exist. Such as, 7 game DS's and 5 game CS's.

Again, you buy into this media nonsense which is just so ridiculous.

Oh, you sure got me. Yeah, I get 100% of my baseball information from ESPN. And I believe in the existence of things like "clutch." Yep, you got me.

The media seems to believe it has to explain everything...there is some special, secret reason why the Angels, or Cubs, or Brewers, etc, lost a game, or a series. The truth is that, in many, many instances, it is just a completely RANDOM series of events. It just happens. A team loses a short series because it didnt pitch especially well, or didnt get timely hits, or just didnt play good baseball. Thats it. Thats all there is to it.

Uh... I guess it doesn't matter what type of team you're taking into the series then.

From April to October, every year, there are teams that lose a short series to inferior teams solely because they didnt play good baseball. Thats IT. Thats all there is to it. Like many others, I get tired of hearing all these pseudo experts try to make more of it than it is. History has shown us that ANY team can beat any other in a short series. There is no mystery to it.

And you're still ranting about the pseudo-experts that I don't even agree with.

This "Built for the playoffs" is the latest baseball cliche. Dont forget to also say that the "postseason is a crapshoot", that Jamie Moyer is "crafty", any particular player will perform exceptionally well "in his contract year", that any particular statistic is or is not "sexy", that there "is no tomorrow", and that any team that scored a run without hitting a home run can "manufacture runs". Surely you can work these into your posts as well.

And you're still doing it...

I didnt take your post out of context, not at all. A careful review will prove that. I simply disagree with what you said, and I proved you wrong.

Uh... no, you didn't, actually. You just think you did because you're close minded.

You arent the only one that makes comments that are untrue, and it really isnt your fault. You just believe the garbage you hear the media espouse and you repeat it.

I'm glad you know me so well. I'm glad you've been around me all my life and watched how I take in information about sports. And I'm glad you can read my mind while I'm making my posts.

Is making conclusions all you can do? I mean, other than talking about nonexistent playoff series?

I suggest you educate yourself.

I'd suggest the same to you, actually, but whatever.

Try doing a little research of your own sometime, or maybe read any of the 40 odd books authored by Bill James, or someone of his ilk.

Oh, OK. I get it now.

I've read plenty of Bill James and those "of his ilk." Just because I happen to believe in the concept of a team being built to match up well against certain other teams in a playoff series doesn't mean I "buy into the media" or "repeat that garbage" or "lack education" or whatever other stupid sh*t you feel the need to accuse me of. It means, uh, guess what, I can actually form my OWN opinions, and not borrow each and every single one of them from a mathematician, like you seem to have done. That's the irony of this... you're actually the one repeating everything you hear.

As much as I appreciate the work of James, et al, there comes a point where you have to pull the SABR dick out of your mouth and form your own opinions. People weren't just idiots about baseball for an entire century, and knew absolutely nothing, and were completely clueless... and then statisticians came along and SAVED THEM.

You're a tool.

[Swampdog]

Lol. Yeah Dude, AWESOME post. Totally. I could react just like you...you know, name calling, infantile insults. Lets try this instead.

I have read every post you made, up to the last one. After about 3 lines, I see theres no point in debating you further. You clearly dont know baseball and, like so many, you do not like for anyone to disagree with you.

A few years ago I knew a 5 year old girl. She had heard, apparently, that a cheetah is the fastest running animal. She informed me that her dog was faster than a cheetah. Her dog was a bulldog. I could have probably have outrun her dog. I tried, to no avail to explain to her that, although her dog was probably very fast, he could not outrun a cheetah. Of course, she was determined that she was right, and I could not dissuade her.

There is a good lesson to learn from this. There is no point is debating people on any topic who 1) do not know what they are talking about, 2) Think they know what they are talking about, 3) Refuse to review evidence and facts, and 4) Insist that their subjective opinion is a fact. You, my friend, are like that 5 year old.

Keep thinking that a bulldog can outrun a cheetah, justanewguy. Thats your right to be wrong.

Have a great day.

[justanewguy]

Lol. Yeah Dude, AWESOME post. Totally. I could react just like you...you know, name calling, infantile insults. Lets try this instead.

I have read every post you made, up to the last one. After about 3 lines, I see theres no point in debating you further. You clearly dont know baseball and, like so many, you do not like for anyone to disagree with you.

A few years ago I knew a 5 year old girl. She had heard, apparently, that a cheetah is the fastest running animal. She informed me that her dog was faster than a cheetah. Her dog was a bulldog. I could have probably have outrun her dog. I tried, to no avail to explain to her that, although her dog was probably very fast, he could not outrun a cheetah. Of course, she was determined that she was right, and I could not dissuade her.

There is a good lesson to learn from this. There is no point is debating people on any topic who 1) do not know what they are talking about, 2) Think they know what they are talking about, 3) Refuse to review evidence and facts, and 4) Insist that their subjective opinion is a fact. You, my friend, are like that 5 year old.

Keep thinking that a bulldog can outrun a cheetah, justanewguy. Thats your right to be wrong.

Have a great day.

Uh... what's funny is, I've disagreed with many people in these forums, and it's been civil. Unfortunately, all you could do is passively aggressively ridicule something I said.

You are an aggressive a**hole. It only took me disagreeing with you, twice, for you to, twice, jump into ridicule and stupid accusations.

My "infantile insults" are no worse than you going on and on and on and on and on about how I love the media and how I do nothing but believe what they say, and how I know nothing except what I see on ESPN.

They were also warranted. Because, you were aggressive first, and because you ARE a tool.

Just because I don't agree with ONE point made by Bill James or whoever does not mean I don't know baseball. Just because I do not agree with YOU does not mean I don't know baseball. If you believe that, your logic is, frankly, retarded.

If you actually saw anything I've posted in other threads, you'd see that I fall into the Bill James "camp" probably more often than not. You'd see me arguing against Ryan Howard for MVP, you'd see me quoting adjusted stats, you'd see me putting the word "clutch" in quotes.

But whatever. You're just too weak-minded to form your own opinions. Do you take your coffee the same way as Bill James also?

[Pavelb1]

i forget what it was but it was about years and around 20-22 i THINK

He wants more?? He's not Manny fukking Ramirez.

[HoustonGM]

He wants more?? He's not Manny fukking Ramirez.

Yeah, he's a bit more valuable.