What does Miles have on Lou and Jim?

[BT]

<!--quoteo(post=57406:date=Aug 12 2009, 02:49 PM:name=KBwsb)-->QUOTE (KBwsb @ Aug 12 2009, 02:49 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Eh, Jody, I suppose you're right. I come off sounding like a deeply bitter man.
(although, guess what? Many Chicago Cub fans are exactly that, and for good reason. Still...)

I can see why some of you would like to forget about Jim's off-season boner. I would too. If DeRosa was quietly having a decent season for the Indians instead of blasting homers for our arch-rivals, I suppose the blunder would be easier to take.

It's kind of unrealistic for people to expect the DeRo talk to cease, however. How long did Red Sox fans talk about the scuttling of Babe Ruth? My dad talked about Lou Brock for <i>decades</i>. As Annie Savoy says in Bull Durham, "...and who can forget about Milt Pappas for Frank Robinson, for God's sake?"
A bad trade never goes away.

But at least for me, I'll try to shut up about it for now.
I'd be remiss, however, to not applaud Butch's recent outstanding post.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->


See, this is the problem with you sometimes KB. EVERY move you don't agree with is a "boner" on par with the Ruth or Brock trades. They aren't. You know what? Not signing Furcal wasn't the same thing as trading Brock (2 bad seasons and one fairly good one). Drafting Tyler Colvin was not the same as trading Brock (there are roughly 4 guys who are demonstrably better than Colvin who were drafted after him in the first round, none of them are stars yet, and only one, Drabek, can even hope to be one). Trading DeRosa wasn't the same as trading Ruth. Even if everything you and Butch have said was right. Which it wasn't.