05-04-2009, 04:41 PM
<!--quoteo(post=35407:date=May 4 2009, 03:38 PM:name=Butcher)-->QUOTE (Butcher @ May 4 2009, 03:38 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=35404:date=May 4 2009, 03:35 PM:name=Brock)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Brock @ May 4 2009, 03:35 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=35394:date=May 4 2009, 03:23 PM:name=PcB)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (PcB @ May 4 2009, 03:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=35392:date=May 4 2009, 03:17 PM:name=Brock)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Brock @ May 4 2009, 03:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=35354:date=May 4 2009, 01:17 PM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ May 4 2009, 01:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=35337:date=May 4 2009, 01:02 PM:name=leonardsipes)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (leonardsipes @ May 4 2009, 01:02 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Trading DeReso in order to give the starting 2bman job to Fontenot, save 2.5 mil is a defensible move. Until you sign a guy that you have to assume will miss 50+ games.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Here's a statement I can support.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yep.
And the argument that somehow DeRosa wouldn't be happy if he and Fontenot both stayed is pretty ridiculous. There would have been plenty of at bats to go around, just like there were last season for the two of them.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
How was there plenty for Fontenot last year? He's almost halfway to his AB total from last year. And as we can see, he's no slouch with the bat.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, the point is more about this season. There would have been significantly more at bats to go around this season with Bradley in the equation.
The thing about this whole thing for me is that I really wasn't all that upset with trading DeRosa to get Fontenot more at bats, until we turned around and gave Aaron Miles $5 million to replace him. And yes, in the grand scheme of things, Miles did essentially replace DeRosa. I can't even understand that being a question.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Bingo.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No, Bradley and Miles replaced Edmonds and DeRosa.
Here's a statement I can support.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yep.
And the argument that somehow DeRosa wouldn't be happy if he and Fontenot both stayed is pretty ridiculous. There would have been plenty of at bats to go around, just like there were last season for the two of them.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
How was there plenty for Fontenot last year? He's almost halfway to his AB total from last year. And as we can see, he's no slouch with the bat.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, the point is more about this season. There would have been significantly more at bats to go around this season with Bradley in the equation.
The thing about this whole thing for me is that I really wasn't all that upset with trading DeRosa to get Fontenot more at bats, until we turned around and gave Aaron Miles $5 million to replace him. And yes, in the grand scheme of things, Miles did essentially replace DeRosa. I can't even understand that being a question.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Bingo.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No, Bradley and Miles replaced Edmonds and DeRosa.