05-28-2009, 05:16 PM
<!--quoteo(post=40837:date=May 28 2009, 03:31 PM:name=BT)-->QUOTE (BT @ May 28 2009, 03:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=40830:date=May 28 2009, 03:05 PM:name=leonardsipes)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (leonardsipes @ May 28 2009, 03:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=40829:date=May 28 2009, 01:55 PM:name=Clapp)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Clapp @ May 28 2009, 01:55 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->If Aramis didn't dislocate his shoulder, and Fontenot and Bradley had the stats that they will at the end of the year, people wouldn't be talking about this.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes, but that would not have made the move any smarter. There is no explanation that makes the move a good one.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Of course there is. You just don't agree with it.
Trade the 32 year old making 5 million coming off a career year, so you can afford the switch hitter with the ONE FUCKING THOUSAND OPS, and play the left hander at 2b who had a .900 OPS last year. You get one more lefty in the lineup, you get one more switch hitter in the lineup, you get 3 decent pitching prospects which can be flipped for something at the trading deadline (and one of which, incidently, may end up being our loogy before the year is out), and you don't give up any offense (in theory).
IF Fontenot hits anywhere near as well as last year, and IF Bradley comes close to his career norms, there is nothing wrong with this move.
See this is where I usually get into it with KB. It's when arguable moves somehow become clearly insane moves. You guys are all welcome to think it was a bad idea, and you can make a pretty decent case that it wasn't necessary. It's when you guys further imply that only a brain dead retard with a spike in his head would even consider this plan a viable one that you lose me. It's when you guys somehow assume that any idiot would realize a 31 year old who missed 13 games last year was an injury waiting to happen, you lose me (because everyone knows 31 year olds are 50/50 bets to dislocate their shoulders while diving for a ball). It's when you guys imply that because the lack of a solid left handed hitter wasn't the ONLY reason we lost last year's playoffs, that we don't need one now, you lose me.
It's a defensible plan. It might not be the one I would have chosen, but if everyone did their job, and the entire team didn't take an offensive shit down their legs, it could very well work.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's indefensible because we could've had all of the positive things listed, plus DeRosa. Unless you really believe we couldn't afford the extra $3M -- which seems preposterous to me.
Yes, but that would not have made the move any smarter. There is no explanation that makes the move a good one.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Of course there is. You just don't agree with it.
Trade the 32 year old making 5 million coming off a career year, so you can afford the switch hitter with the ONE FUCKING THOUSAND OPS, and play the left hander at 2b who had a .900 OPS last year. You get one more lefty in the lineup, you get one more switch hitter in the lineup, you get 3 decent pitching prospects which can be flipped for something at the trading deadline (and one of which, incidently, may end up being our loogy before the year is out), and you don't give up any offense (in theory).
IF Fontenot hits anywhere near as well as last year, and IF Bradley comes close to his career norms, there is nothing wrong with this move.
See this is where I usually get into it with KB. It's when arguable moves somehow become clearly insane moves. You guys are all welcome to think it was a bad idea, and you can make a pretty decent case that it wasn't necessary. It's when you guys further imply that only a brain dead retard with a spike in his head would even consider this plan a viable one that you lose me. It's when you guys somehow assume that any idiot would realize a 31 year old who missed 13 games last year was an injury waiting to happen, you lose me (because everyone knows 31 year olds are 50/50 bets to dislocate their shoulders while diving for a ball). It's when you guys imply that because the lack of a solid left handed hitter wasn't the ONLY reason we lost last year's playoffs, that we don't need one now, you lose me.
It's a defensible plan. It might not be the one I would have chosen, but if everyone did their job, and the entire team didn't take an offensive shit down their legs, it could very well work.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's indefensible because we could've had all of the positive things listed, plus DeRosa. Unless you really believe we couldn't afford the extra $3M -- which seems preposterous to me.