I agree with the first part, and I'm fine with that. I trust Theo's measure of value. He's right a lot more than he's wrong, with the most glaring example of the latter being Texiera, but the Yanks probably would have just bid $1 more.
And I'm on board with his signing Lackey. Love the deal. And Beltre is a good deal as well for the Sox as well. Gives us great flexibility. But I'm just not buying the notion that we've disovered the secretthat defense is the THE key to winning, and that's why we're adding capable fielders. We signed the capable fielders because they're willing to play for short money. . . On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 12:56 PM, Steve Ouellette <[email protected]>wrote: > Really? It seems obvious to me that -- unable or unwilling to pony up for > Holliday or Bay -- the Sox decided to focus on defense and pitching. > > Steve O > > > >> But I'm not going to lean too heavily on the defense argument. It just >> strikes me more as a justification for deals that have happened than an >> explanation of why the Sox made the deals in the first place. >> >> >> >> > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Red Sox Citizens" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]<redsoxcitizens%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/redsoxcitizens?hl=en. > >--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Red Sox Citizens" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected].
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/redsoxcitizens?hl=en.
