09-12-2009, 10:34 PM
<!--quoteo(post=62816:date=Sep 12 2009, 03:24 PM:name=Butcher)-->QUOTE (Butcher @ Sep 12 2009, 03:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=62810:date=Sep 12 2009, 02:40 PM:name=BT)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BT @ Sep 12 2009, 02:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=62792:date=Sep 12 2009, 12:44 PM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Sep 12 2009, 12:44 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Yeah. BT will find himself lonely on this one.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's got NOTHING to do with what BT thinks on this one. I am telling you, AS A FACT, Lee's contract is generally regarded as AWFUL. By pretty much everyone but you guys. He is almost as untradeable as Soriano. He is getting 18.5 for the next 3 years after this one. He's a bad fielder. He plays in a bandbox. If you believe Astro fans, he is lazy to boot.
I'm not saying Soriano is better than him. I am saying that complaining about a shitty fielding, all bat, left fielder who is getting older and still has an unmovable monster contract left to deal with, then posing the idea that Carlos would be the ANSWER to that, is absurd.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Is Lee's contract bad? Sure. But it's two years shorter than Soriano's -- which makes it a whole lot easier to swallow. Lee and Alf were signed in the same offseason -- that's why the comparison continues to get drawn. Who wouldn't trade Alf for Lee, straight-up?
Nobody is saying Lee's contract is a steal. But it's a much better contract than Alf's. And he has been a much better player as well. I'm not even sure what you're arguing.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm arguing that the saying the ideal person to replace an older overpaid one dimensional left fielder who will be horribly overpaid by the end of his contract is NOT Carlos Lee.
I'm arguing that hating Soriano because he is overpaid, and wanting Lee instead is illogical.
Would I trade Soriano for Lee? Yes. But it's ridiculous to pretend that one is a disaster and the other would be a savior. You would have pretty much all of the same problems with Lee, they'd only be slightly less bad.
It's got NOTHING to do with what BT thinks on this one. I am telling you, AS A FACT, Lee's contract is generally regarded as AWFUL. By pretty much everyone but you guys. He is almost as untradeable as Soriano. He is getting 18.5 for the next 3 years after this one. He's a bad fielder. He plays in a bandbox. If you believe Astro fans, he is lazy to boot.
I'm not saying Soriano is better than him. I am saying that complaining about a shitty fielding, all bat, left fielder who is getting older and still has an unmovable monster contract left to deal with, then posing the idea that Carlos would be the ANSWER to that, is absurd.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Is Lee's contract bad? Sure. But it's two years shorter than Soriano's -- which makes it a whole lot easier to swallow. Lee and Alf were signed in the same offseason -- that's why the comparison continues to get drawn. Who wouldn't trade Alf for Lee, straight-up?
Nobody is saying Lee's contract is a steal. But it's a much better contract than Alf's. And he has been a much better player as well. I'm not even sure what you're arguing.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm arguing that the saying the ideal person to replace an older overpaid one dimensional left fielder who will be horribly overpaid by the end of his contract is NOT Carlos Lee.
I'm arguing that hating Soriano because he is overpaid, and wanting Lee instead is illogical.
Would I trade Soriano for Lee? Yes. But it's ridiculous to pretend that one is a disaster and the other would be a savior. You would have pretty much all of the same problems with Lee, they'd only be slightly less bad.
I wish that I believed in Fate. I wish I didn't sleep so late. I used to be carried in the arms of cheerleaders.