Yes, I am saying that the best defensive teams didn't win last year, so defense doesn't matter -- much. It matters a little, but it doesn't matter enough to delude ourselves into thinking that a strong defense makes a team great.
On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 3:29 PM, Steve Ouellette <[email protected]>wrote: > > > And I don't know what Ray is trying to say. The best defensive teams didn't > win last year, so defense doesn't matter? > > I don't think anyone expected that ragtag collection the Mariners threw out > there to win 85 games last year and have the best ERA in the American > League. That defense (and that park) made Jarrod Washburn a star, and he > flat out sucks. Nobody predicted San Francisco, the top defensive team in > the NL, to win 88 games either. Some experts thought they'd be the worst > team in the league. > > The difference between those teams and the Sox is that Boston also has a > very competitive offense. I'm looking forward to 2010. > > Steve O > > > On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 2:27 PM, Tom Salemi <[email protected]> wrote: > >> 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]<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]<redsoxcitizens%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/redsoxcitizens?hl=en. > > -- Author of "Leading After a Layoff: Reignite Your Team's Productivity in Just 12 Weeks" www.leadingafteralayoff.com--
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.
