ptatc

I never said you can't . I just pointed out that you don't use it in the context of the question and/or post that you are responding to. We all know your view on it and you certainly can say whatever you want. However, you continually twist whatever post to which you are responding back to the same topic instead of the post to which you are responding. It doesn't matter if someone calls me out or nails me on anything. The point still remains about replying to the content of the actual posts.

Ok. Good. I was reading it correctly. Some on the board are so convoluted in the points that it's like reading a student paper where they needed 25 pages but only had 20 pages of material.

Cubs too.

Don't need to try again. You continue to rehash the same thing but don't address any points people are making. This post in question had nothing to do with what happened at the time of the mazara trade. It had everything to do with what would have happened if the trade hadn't occurred.

I guess you and I read things in a totally different context. I didn't read any of them that way.

Again, you missing the point of posts. He isn't saying that there weren't better options. He was saying that if the Sox waited until today to acquire a player would would have been complaining the whole time that they don't have one yet. In your post, Castellanos and Ozuna aren't available today so they don't count.

This deal was not available at the time. They weren't trading Perderson until they acquired Betts. This whole scenario is moot. Maybe I am undervaluing him. However, as of the recent deal he wasn't worth the extra capital on top of what the Sox already used to acquire him at this point.

At least the trade wasn't done to fund a theater play.

No doubt. I can understand their concept of staying under the cap and getting rid of the awful contract for price but sacrificing Betts seems like a bad way to do it.

Better option at what price that is the key factors. Pederson was not an option at the time. He was recently but it's not worth the extra capital. As the original poster said, pederson has flaws as well and you are over valuing him based on what the Sox acquired which has nothing to do with his value to the Angels.

If you would stick to the point if the post of Pederson's value, yes. However twisting into the Sox FO again gets a little tiresome. But it's a Sox board so have at it.

You can do that if you want, that's my point. You turned a comment by someone that pederson is a flawed played and said he is better than Mazara. I dont think anyone would disagree that is is currently true but you seem to turn every conversation to it.

Again, you are missing the point. Stop trying to compare the 2 players. I know you are looking to boast the Sox FO as much as you can. However the entire point is the value of pederson for what the angels are giving up. It his value in this trade. Mazara is not involved in this trade.

You arent reading it correctly. He isn't saying mazara doesn't have faults, he's saying Pederson does and people are far over valuing him for this trade.

No. But he is a friend of mine. He didn't kick him, he punched him. AJ took a bounced pitched to the balls. When the trainer came to him to ask him how he feels, AJ punched him and said "like this, what do you think."

This is new. I don't know anyone who didn't like Konerko. He is genuinely a good guy.

Very few people liked him. From any of the organization he played for.

I like that one. Chicago pizza is unique and can't be found anywhere else.

The Sox have a better ability to absorb the injuries. They will have Kopech ready so they could bring him up. They don't want to but could if they are in contention early on.

Not really. Puig is a known clubhouse cancer to drag his teammates down. AJ wasn't like that, he was just an a$$hole.

With his bat control, he will as to use an old quote "hit them where they ain't" He will struggle at first with turning on MLB fastballs but once he gets the feel for it his skills will translate well.

I like it as well.

I don't necessarily agree. The formula they use to weight runs by ballpark doesn't really look at who plays there. For example, a division like the AL East with higher scoring team is going to skew the numbers one way whereas the NL central in previous years with the Reds (not the current version) Brewers and Pirates really would skew it the other way. These really change the "opportunity" to score runs and skews the ballpark weighting. All of these stats have their limitations. However, actually scoring runs is the way teams actually win games. RBI and runs scored still have their value.

You cant equate a major league sports team to the regular world. It's pretty rare that the workers make millions more than the management in the real world. You have to deal with those egos and the way it is done is with other players because the players dont listen to a manager making millions less than them when they arent at least somewhat happy. This is the primary job of an MLB manager. Otherwise you wind up with Chris Sale shredding jerseys or LaRoche having his kid live in the clubhouse.

I disagree. Things like leadership should be rewarded. I know Boras does an extensive presentation about what an athlete can bring to the community and uses it as part of his value for the client during negotiations.