Now I wish I'd had the nads in early April to post my planned "this team isn't good enough to beat the Rays/Yanks" email. But I let hope and emotion get the better of me.
Two things, 1. I never anticipated the pitching would be this bad. And it should improve. 2. While I'm okay with a rebuilding or bridge year, I ahve to wonder what's on the otherside of the bridge that's going to make 2011 decidedly better than 2010? Other than free agents. I know we have a lot of nice young talent, but do we have enough? On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 7:53 AM, Ray Salemi <[email protected]> wrote: > Tom was prescient as to the results of this team. Here's his comment from > January. > > I'm on board with the "Theo is rebuilding" as a theme for this year. So > now it's time for some low stress baseball. > > Ray > > PS. No wonder he's kicking my ass in Roto. > > On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 4:40 PM, Tom Salemi <[email protected]> wrote: > >> As am I. I just take exception to the tone of such articles that fawn over >> Theo's brilliance in acquiring players like Beltre. >> >> -- >> This is simply a tremendous addition for the Red Sox. They got a +3 win >> player with upside, at age 30, on a one year deal for $10 million. They >> significantly upgraded over *Mike >> Lowell*<http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=527&position=3B>, >> and put their defense back on track to being an asset, not a liability. Theo >> Epstein saw an opportunity to add undervalued assets and made huge >> improvements to the team by bringing in both Cameron and Beltre. >> >> Boston fans, get ready to be spoiled. You’ll never see another third >> baseman play the hot corner as well as you’ll see it played in 2010. >> -- >> >> I don't think Cameron and Beltre count as HUGE IMPROVEMENTS to the team. >> >> Bottomline, Theo is wisely saving his chits for the next off-season. He'll >> go hard after Mauer and Gonzalez. Maybe take a shot at Lee, who knows. I'd >> enjoy watching Carl Crawford play everyday for the Sox. We'll see if Theo >> agrees. >> >> I'm fine with that. It's a sound strategy, and it's one that I recognize >> Theo can't say publicly. We need to win the World Series, or at least beat >> the Yankees, every year. >> >> But just because I agree with the strategy doesn't mean I have to buy into >> the fawning that will go on this off-season. If Beltre were that exceptional >> a signing why wasn't anyone else interested in him? Perhaps all other MLB >> teams are just managed by dummies. >> >> In closing, Theo did a good job with what he had to deal with. I just >> don't think his performance needs any lipstick. >> >> >> >> On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 3:29 PM, Steve Ouellette >> <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> Not saying that it's THE key to winning. It's just one way of winning. If >>> you can score 1,000 runs you can outslug people. If you've got a brilliant >>> pitching staff, you can win lots of low-scoring games. Any way that you can >>> score more runs or allow fewer runs makes you better. I'm just saying adding >>> to the defense may be an underppreciated way of improving a team's run >>> differential, thus cheaper. If the defense can stop 50 runs from scoring, >>> that helps exactly as much as adding 50 runs to the offense. >>> >>> 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. >>> >>> >> >> -- >> 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 "FPGA Simulation: A Complete Step-by-Step Guide" > www.fpgasimulation.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]<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.
