01-05-2009, 09:36 PM
<!--quoteo(post=9231:date=Jan 5 2009, 07:32 PM:name=KBwsb)-->QUOTE (KBwsb @ Jan 5 2009, 07:32 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=9230:date=Jan 5 2009, 07:25 PM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jan 5 2009, 07:25 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->A guy like DeRosa who can hit and play nearly anywhere on the field sure will be useful as insurance if we sign a guy like Bradley.
Oh. Oops.
Don't fucking sign Miles, keep DeRosa, and we're SO much better off. I simply can't get my head wrapped around this thing.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Me neither. Now that we've signed Bradley to play 99 or 100 games a year for us, the DeRosa trade actually makes LESS sense than on the day it happened, if that's possible.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Agreed...there just HAS to be another shoe dropping. Trading DeRosa to make room for this particular player is backwards logic.
Still...I've grown to love the Bradley signing on its own merits.
Oh. Oops.
Don't fucking sign Miles, keep DeRosa, and we're SO much better off. I simply can't get my head wrapped around this thing.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Me neither. Now that we've signed Bradley to play 99 or 100 games a year for us, the DeRosa trade actually makes LESS sense than on the day it happened, if that's possible.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Agreed...there just HAS to be another shoe dropping. Trading DeRosa to make room for this particular player is backwards logic.
Still...I've grown to love the Bradley signing on its own merits.