Dan Gould

Good is debatable, but at least no one would suggest it belongs in politics, and for Dowd, that means I actually read it all the way through.

The way Franco takes care of himself, I could almost imagine him at the age of 60 still employed as a legit pinch-hitter. No Minnie Minoso BS appearances for him - he'd be up there, with 1% body fat, working the pitcher.

Wait a sec - are we saying that for each of these albums - shelved for one reason or another - these are original Reid Miles covers that were produced at the time? I thought Happy Frame of Mind was supposed to be a Booker Ervin release ... and then it got split off from one of the brown LP cover twofers of the 70s. This was the original Reid cover, with Parlan as leader? I'm really confused on some of these ...

Listen up, now shithead. You've never shown me to be wrong in any single way. I on the other hand, have shown you to be wrong, for example, on the simple question of how the Red Sox acquired Curt Schilling: by making an offer TO THE DIAMONDBACKS, NOT HIM, as you asserted. Who's going to make who his bitch? As for the rest of it, You ASSERT that the Red Sox should spend more money. Why? Because you say so? The fact is they are not. It is their right. The fact also is that, regardless of how George Steinbrenner spends money at a net loss to field the "best" team, teams that take different approaches can still win, if they reach the playoffs. It may very well be impossible to compete across 162 games against a 210 million dollar payroll, but thank heaven for the WC. Anything can happen in the playoffs, and the goal of the organization remains to REACH the playoffs or have an excellent chance, by winning 95 games at minimum. You ASSERT that the youngsters trade value has declined and Theo is now "stuck" with them, yet you are NOT A GM and have NO KNOWLEDGE whatsoever of what their trade value is, or for that matter, was. You ASSERT that Pena is a worthless ballplayer, and I have given you countless reasons why he continues to develop and has a very high ceiling: A respected GM predicts 40-50 homers per year by the age of 26. His homer rate per PA in 2004-2005 SUPPORTS 45+ homers over a single season. His BA, OBP and strikeout rates have all shown significant improvement this season. His PECOTA comparables include many players who are HoF members or had solid near HoF careers. To this, you simply say ... nothing other than "he has no plate discipline" and "he's Mel Hall". Just as you know NOTHING about trade values, you know NOTHING about ballplayer evaluation. You're not a scout, you don't work in a front office, and you can't even cite statistics to suggest that my projections are off the charts, as I actually have STATISTICAL EVIDENCE to support my assertions. Your assertions are supported by what? Your own pathetic insistence that a team must spend to the absolute maximum possible. I got it-you're a member of the staff of the player's union, right? That's why you hate the Red Sox for not spending more money on free agents. Your own self-serving assumption about declining trade values of young players. Your own claims that have no statistical backing whatsoever and are contradicted by the opinions of baseball professionals as well Baseball Prospectus. Glad you're sticking here, and please, oh please make me your bitch, sir. When you get a break though, take a look at "My Controls" and then scan down the left column for options. You get one chance to guess where you'll be, which is one more chance than you'd ever get to earn a living peddling your supposed baseball expertise.

One more for you, dipshit. From the Sons of Sam Horn website: If Pena's develops into Stargell or Howard, I'll be looking for you in the crowd at Cooperstown in about 20 years. But I'm not predicting that he will. All he has to do is be comparable to Belle, Murphy, Canseco, Gibson, and you will be proven a fool yet again. Like I said, stick around. We'll be discussing this in this future.

So in order to win, one has to run a business at a loss? And that is the only way to win. You're reaching new levels of stupidity, so congratulations. Then you might want to check the Marlins in 2003, the Angels in 2002 and the White Sox in 2005. You might also take a look at the A's and this year's Tigers. Their values have not declined whatsoever. Crisp was not "untradeable" he is the established player the Braves specifically asked for. Three weeks of poor performance do not effect the value of near-major league ready 23 year old pitchers. They don't help it but they don't hurt it either. For you to say that "had they played well, their values would have increased" only shows that with each successive post you write less intelligent things. No young player's trade value jumps in any way shape or form by having a good couple of weeks, or a good month. If he has a good year and looks ready to bust out, yeah, his value is higher. Beating the Yankees or blowing games wide open to the Yankees in a single series doesn't do a goddamn thing to their value. Pena has no plate discipline, yet his OBP has jumped by 40 points over his career average, his BA is 50 points over his career average, and his SO rate has dropped 70 points. Apparently, in your world, such improvements at the age of 24 mean nothing, he is what he is and will never improve. So, we have you, an asshole making pronouncements about what the future holds for young players, vs the learned opinion of professionals like GM Wayne Krivsky who stated that he "hated" to give up Pena but needed the pitching help and he predicted 45-50 homers per season within two years. If the Boston Globe website had a search function, I'd show you the quote. It appeared in the last 3 weeks, while Arroyo's failure to win his tenth game was leading people to re-evaluate that trade. so: asshole spouting off on a BB OR baseball professional with 27 years in the business including holding scouting positions. Who's opinion gets more respect? The Sox gave WHO the better offer??? They didn't give Schilling an offer, dumbass. They gave the Diamondbacks an acceptable offer and then convinced him to waive his no-trade. Don't start talking about reading comprehension when you're basic knowledge of facts is so limited. Make sure your ass sticks around this BB because I intend to bring up all of these issues again when you're stupidity gets a dose of reality in 2007 and beyond.

I can't leave this little nugget alone. Let's talk more about "core" players, Yanks vs Red Sox: Yankee core player ages when they won in '96: Jeter, 22 Bernie, 27 O'Neil, 33 Tino, 28 Posada, 24 (and not a regular) Rivera, 26 Pettite, 24 These players were all YOUNG and in their primes. Only O'Neil was past 30, and iirc, he was signed for a significant period of time. In other words: The Yankees had NO DECISIONS to make about keeping the core of that championship team in place. They only had to add a piece or two each season to keep the winning going. Red Sox core players when they won in 2004: Tek, 32 Millar, 32 Mueller, 33 Manny, 32 Trot, 30 Pedro, 32 Lowe, 31 Through no fault of his own, (Dan Duquette set it up that way), Nixon, Nomar, Tek, Pedro and Lowe all had their contracts expiring at the end of 2004. What team, in this inflated market for free agents, can be expected to spend sufficient money to keep all of their "core" players? The fact of the matter is that the 2004 team was designed to be the one last, best chance for that group to make it to the promised land. There were going to be changes afterward, and no smart GM would commit huge dollars to keep such a team "together". It was a position that Brian Cashman never had to find himself in, due to the ages of his core at the time of the championship. instead, Theo kept the heart and soul of the team (Tek), retained those pieces that made sense and began the process of building a SUSTAINABLE successful roster. Key players being signed til they are all 36-37 is a recipe for disaster. This team HAD to get younger, and as crushing as this season has been, Theo made the moves that are necessary for the long-term. Whether enough of them will work out to create that long-term success remains to be seen, but the fact is that in Spring Training, there was a quote of the Indians' GM to the effect that "The Red Sox have done it right - they may not win this year, but they are poised for a five year run of domination." I really wish I could find that quote, but trust me, that is the gist of what was said. And I tend to be a bit more respectful of the opinions of successful General Managers than jack ass BB posters. And that includes me.

I suggest you take a look at my dissection of his "insight", David. I was writing it while you posted.

So, it took the collapse of the Red Sox to make you want to post. I simply found it odd that someone jumped full force into this thread for his very first two posts. I stated this poorly, as I am well aware that the Phils have paid Abreu up until August 1st and the Yankees pay the balance. I am not stupid enough to think that the Yankees reimburse the Phillies for the time he spent on their roster. Nevertheless, my statement about Abreu's costs are PRECISELY correct. The remaining salary for 2006, plus 2007 plus the luxury tax hit is 24 milion dollars. And how do YOU know what the Red Sox revenue is and what exactly is going to the owners/investors??? How do YOU know the balance sheet? THERE IS NO FUCKING WAY THAT THE RED SOX CAN SPEND "ON THE SAME MARGINS" AS THE YANKEES. THE YANKEE REVENUE DWARFS THE RED SOX. RED SOX OWNERSHIP REFUSES TO PLAY THE SAME GAME, AS IS THEIR RIGHT. THEIR OBLIGATION TO THE FANS IS TO FIELD A COMPETITIVE TEAM. WITHOUT THE CRUSHING INJURIES THEY HAD THIS YEAR, THE TEAM WAS COMPETITIVE TO A POINT. BUT NO TEAM HAS TO SPEND LIKE A DRUNKEN ASSHOLE MINI-STEINBRENNER JUST BECAUSE GEORGE DOES IT. YOU KNOW WHY? LOOK AT THE TEAMS THAT HAVE WON SINCE THE END OF THE LAST STEINBRENNER DYNASTY. THERE IS ANOTHER WAY. YOU'RE DRINKING THE KOOL-AID IF YOU THINK THAT THE ONLY WAY TO CONTEND WITH THE YANKEES IS TO SPEND SPEND SPEND. The plan WAS NOT to use Lester, Delcarmen and Hansen this year as if they were 100% ready to perform in high-leverage situations. The plan was to bring them along this season so that they would be ready next year. INJURIES and INEFFECTIVENESS forced them to be used. To say that their value on the trade market is diminished is simply asinine. The Sox asked the Braves about Andruw Jones. Their response was "Coco, Hansen and Lester". If you think that these growing pains have done anything to reduce their value, you are every bit as stupid as 99% of what you have posted. Here's a good reason why my projections for WMP easily defended: In his last two seasons with Cincinnati, he had 730 Plate Appearances. He hit 45 homers. Ortiz had 713 PA in 2005 and hit 47 homers. Manny had 650 PA in 2005 and hit 45 homers. His homer rate is essentially the same as Manny and Ortiz. GOT IT? In addition, there is no question that he has shown significant improvement in all areas of hitting this season: His BA is 51 points over his career average. His OBP is 40 points over his career average. HIs OPS is 70 points over his career average. His strikeout rate has dropped from .373 in his last year with Cincy to .305 in his first year in Boston. HE IS ONLY 24. Time will tell - and time is most assuredly on his side. IT IS COMPLETELY WRONG TO SUGGEST THAT THE YANKEES AND RED SOX COMPETE WITH THE SAME RESOURCES. THE YANKEES HAVE A 54,000 SEAT CAPACITY STADIUM. EVEN WITH THE IMPROVEMENTS, THE RED SOX HAVE A 36,000 SEAT CAPACITY. EVEN WITH THE ENORMOUS TICKET PRICES THE RED SOX CHARGE, I GUARANTEE THAT STADIUM REVENUE OF A TEAM WITH 4 MILLION IN ATTENDANCE DWARFS THAT OF A TEAM THAT CAN'T EVEN DRAW 3 MILLION BECAUSE OF THE SIZE OF THE STADIUM. As for your list of players "allowed to walk" or "given more attractive offers": SCHILLING WASN'T A FREE AGENT. CLEMENS RETIRED. Schilling stopped being a power pitcher this season, if you've paid any attention. He knows he doesn't have the gas everytime he needs it and has worked in new pitches and new patterns. Given another year to refine his new approach, there is no reason why he cannot be at least as effective as he was this year, barring injury. You ought to check your stats before declaring Beckett to have few "quality starts". He's made 26 starts, and 15 of them qualify. That's 60% of the time. If you think that Beckett has as many wins as he does because of run support and nothing else, that is a total misconception. His problem is that when he is bad, he is very bad, and that results in a pretty bad ERA. Papelbon is not being "asked" to become a starter: he was groomed as a starter from the moment he signed. Unlike closers like Rivera who were failed starters, Papelbon has four "plus" pitches (he dropped his curve when he became a closer) and I don't see how anyone can think that 220 innings out of a dominant horse doesn't have greater value than 70-80 innings. Either way is a win-win for the team: If he balks at going back to starting, we have a dominant closer. If we replace him with an above-average closer and he wins 20, I guarantee the final results are better than if he saves 40 and Matt Clement is in the rotation instead. Its not an idea or a necessity, IT HAS BEEN THE PLAN ALL ALONG: ADHERE to a budget. Make CLEAR-EYED DECISIONS about how to value players on your roster as well as potential free agents/acquisitions. DEVELOP home-grown talent so that you can MAXIMIZE available payroll for IMPACT free agents. Scout and sign enough young talent that you have usable trade bait if the right trade comes up. But make CLEAR-EYED decisions about the value of trade acquisitions in a seller's market vs the value of young players.

First of all, thanks for answering my questions. Not. More importantly, you are frightfully misinformed on a number of counts. The Phils ARE not paying Abreu's salary in 2006. They did pay Abreu the 1.5 million necessary for him to waive his no-trade and accept that the Yankees would not automatically guarantee his option year. The Red Sox ARE NOT with unlimited resources. Theo's limits are approximately 125 mil in salary and another 20-25 mil in luxury tax. Abreu's salary plus luxury tax would have been 24 million, the vast majority of it next season. It was not an option. How can anyone say that Theo "overestimated" his own prospects? Lester has made what? 12 starts? Delcarmen and Hansen haven't reached 50 appearances between them. The problem is not over-estimating their talents, its throwing them into the fire when they aren't quite ready. Hansen and Delcarmen will be major league pitchers for a long time, and are likely to excel. Pena is a "career" fourth outfielder ... ok, but WHY? Because he ran out of minor league options at the age of TWENTY ONE and has been forced to learn at the major league level for three years. Of course he's been a fourth outfielder - what team can afford to put such a young, inexperienced player into the every day lineup? His development got screwed by the contract the Yankees gave him. In less than a full year learning from Papa Jack, Manny and David, his OBP has jumped by 80 points over his career average, and his BA has jumped by nearly 50 points (when he was up over .300 up until recently, his jump in BA was over .60 points). Call Gabe Kapler a career fourth outfielder - he came up on a normal course of development, played, stuck around, and settled into what his skills make him: a fourth outfielder. WMP CANNOT be described the same way. So long as his development continues as it has this year, I will predict that within two years, he'll put up a line something like: .290 - 48 - 120 - with an OBP of .380. Talk to me in two years and we'll see if I am right. But don't write him off as some marginal player when he's only 24 and has to learn his craft against major league pitching. About John Henry and the supposedly never-ending stream of revenue. Henry and the rest of the ownership group paid 750 million dollars for the team, iirc. It wasn't cash money. There was financing involved. In fact, said financing requires significant payment starting I believe in 2007. So the idea that endless revenue can simply go back into the payroll is simply stupid. Which brings us to Theo: It is simply STUPID to suggest that "locks on the checkbook" drove him away. The argument that led to Theo's departure was about that very attitude of win now at any cost. Theo does not want to take the approach of win at all costs, always. With a budget and financial limits, a team MUST develop its own talent, and give that talent a chance to fail. The simple fact is that the Yankees, with unlimited payroll, can simply spend out of any problems that may come up with aging former stars. The Red Sox cannot. That means looking long and hard at players who are leaving their prime and entering the decline phase. which leads me to Pedro. Pedro's ERA last year was 2.82. The current difference between an NL starter ERA and AL starter ERA is approximately 1.5. Add that to Pedro's ERA and you get 4.32, which would be a career high. Despite the results of the 2004 postseason, the Yankees had completely destroyed Pedro's mystique and sense of being unbeatable. Who needs such a pitcher if they can't beat your arch-rival? Add to that the fact that Pedro has morphed into Frank Tanana, with a fastball that no longer breaks 90 mph, on a GOOD day, and Pedro's presence would make not a bit of difference. The decision was the correct one. As far as Damon goes, as I said, it looks like the Crisp move was a poor decision. On the other hand, in two years, Jacob Ellsbury will be at Fenway, and he will make everyone forget about Damon. By every account, the greatest CF since Fred Lynn. So looking ahead to 2007: Yes there are big issues for the starting rotation and there may be even more growing pains and general unhappiness. In the NL, I would consider only Jason Schmidt and Roy Oswalt as pitchers who could succeed in the AL (plus Clemens, should he do the same thing as this year and return in June). Schmidt is too old however. Barring some sort of trade, the key to the season will be whether or not Beckett turns out to be stubborn and stupid or smart enough to make the adjustments necessary. With the addition of a closer that allows Papelbon to start, I'll take Schilling, Papelbon and Beckett against any other group in the major leagues. Last thing, I can't let this go by: WINNING in 2004 is what gave Theo the chance to do the right thing and start building a long-term winner. Yeah, you'd like to win multiple times with Ortiz-Manny in the lineup. But how can you accomplish that by keeping Lowe, Pedro, Mueller, et. al, all of whom entering their mid-30s and costing big bucks to keep? Their inevitable declines make them untradeable when the bottom falls out. Without the unlimited resources of the Yankees to spend their way out of it, they'd be stuck with a decrepit pathetic roster and would have turned into the Washington Redskins of MLB. Now, with the payroll restraint they've instituted (Youklis, Pedroia, Papelbon, Lester, Delcarmen, Hansen all playing important roles at very low salary; Crisp signed cheaply; there are other very good players on the way from AA) I will bet that the Sox will activate the option on Manny and he will be here through at least 2008. With the limited investment in younger players, they will have the ability to build the necessary firepower around Ortiz-Manny, through free-agency. How about Vernon Wells or Andruw Jones? The Red Sox will have the money to go after talent like that, and with the Yankees wrapped up in the outfield, won't even have to worry about the Yankees getting into the bidding.

Dustin Hoffman Mrs. Robinson Simon & Garfunkle

Marty: With two years to run on Pedro's enormous Met contract, and Pedro on the shelf yet again this year, is anyone doubting that it was the right move to let him walk? You are taking a single clutch performance and calling Derek Lowe "always up to face the Yankees". He SUCKED against the Yankees 90% of the time. The Sports Guy's term "the Derek Lowe face" came up after one of his many collapses against them. Have you forgotten that when the Sox made a final push for the division in 2004, it was Lowe who couldn't get out of the first inning? The "lack of financial restrictions" line is missing one element: its a lack of financial restrictions on ONE TEAM. Every other team has financial restrictions: its called a budget. The second highest revenue/payroll team could have gotten Abreu, but 24 million in salary+luxury tax was not acceptable. It meant nothing to the Yankees. Kevin Millar: Extraordinarily streaky in his career, he's now streaking his way out of baseball. 2005 was horrible, and his season with Baltimore is completely forgettable. Meanwhile, Youklis is matching his power numbers, way exceeding his OBP and BA, and plays a far better first base. Bill Mueller: Yeah, great player, a gamer and all that - but the Dodgers gave him a bunch of money as a free agent, he had knee surgery yet again, and is now toast. What was supposed to be 3 weeks rehab has turned into a lifetime because his knees just can't handle it anymore. Makes the Lowell trade look pretty good. You may not "recognize" the team anymore, but no one can argue that those moves were the correct ones, particularly now. As for Trot Nixon: His injury history and declining production marks him as gone after this season. Strikes me, however, as analogous to the Bernie Williams situation for the Yankees: longest tenure on the team, old friend, been through the wars together, terribly declining skill set. The Yankees had Bernie signed through and beyond his declining skills. I'll be happier wishing Trot the best elsewhere than watching him play like Bernie Williams, ca 2005. That's smart management. And were you at all impressed with Wily Mo Pena? Just talking about the final game: the guy who is supposed to K more often than he farts went 0-2 and worked it to a full count walk. Then barely touched an outside pitch and hit it into the bullpen. You watch ... next year, the year after, WMP is going to be Jim Rice ca 1978, only with a better glove and arm. While I will always maintain that this season was lost, in chronological order 1) When Foulke did not regain his form and Papelbon didn't go to the starting rotation 2) When Wells, and then Clement, went down, resulting in the endless succession of Jason Johnson, et. al starts. 3) When Tavarez and Seanez spit the bit and forced the on-the-job learning of Hansen and Delcarmen 4) When Clemens decided that keeping the hometown fans happy was more important than his own happiness. the loss of Wakefield and Varitek were the final nails in the coffin. Wakefield's absence meant that one of the few pitchers who could go 7 or 7+ innings was gone, leading to the final implosion of the overworked bullpen. And while Varitek wasn't hitting very well, the young guys in the pen and rotation had some success with him, and I think that was related to his pitch-calling and ability to spot necessary adjustments mid-game. I don't have splits, but I am sure that Delcarmen, Hansen and Lester all have terrible numbers since Varitek went down. If you haven't noticed, Marty, the team has been in transition since 2004. Those core players who came together for a magical 3 months were at the end of their lines, for the most part. Can anyone doubt that the Red Sox are better off with Youk instead of Millar, Lowell instead of Mueller, Loretta instead of Bellhorn, and that Pedro would decline further and wasn't worth the money/years? So yeah, you don't recognize the team anymore. And its obvious Theo has made some bad decisions as well as good ones (Renteria; the jury may be out on Coco but I am inclined to say it was a bad decision). But you know what? We're down to about 90 million committed to 2007. That leaves 30-35 million dollars for free agents or added payroll via trade. Jason Schmidt? Andruw Jones? Julio Lugo? a closer like Borowski so Papelbon can be a starter? I may be terminally depressed over this year, but I remain extremely optimistic going forward.

Bob Feller Roger Clemens Jonathon Papelbon

Before I depart this thread, who are you, heatwave? Have you lurked here long? What are your baseball allegiances? And will you join us in the jazz discussions?

I'm in a fabulous mood, thank you very much. I was rooting for the result which occured, my only disappointment came when the Yankees scored a run in the 8th and then WMP hit the homer. I was rooting for a 1-0 final, as that would achieve the ultimate cap of a 5 game sweep - shut out at home by a number 5 pitcher against a team that starts Nick Green at SS. So, unfortunately, the ultimate embarassment didn't happen, but this will do just fine. This isn't Boston Massacre II - this is a whole nother animal. In 1978, they were simply blown out in four straight (if I remember correctly, the last game was 8-3 and the closest one). This team, however, found a way to lose one extra game, and to lose in every way possible: Blown out Blown out after blowing a 10-7 lead A competitive game blown up by the bullpen into a rout Having the best closer in the team's history blow a game that might have allowed them to salvage the series (if the Yankees are truly blessed, Craig Hansen has been destroyed by this experience and will never pitch to the level he was supposed to. He'll be Brad Lidge without ever earning a single save) Finally getting lights out starting pitching and relief and still losing 2-1.

I've ordered one time in the past, almost exactly a year ago. Very smooth. Info on shipping times were accurate (when it said 3-4 days, within 4 days I got a notice that the item was now being shipped to me). No worries, Dmitry.

That Edwards CD is a must-have.

As a popularity contest, the Lee Morgan album isn't surprising but I'd replace it with Search For The New Land.

Are there ANY questions now? Let me borrow a phrase from Jim Carrey: So Long, F*ckers!

That reply sounds like Michael and it wouldn't surprise me if he didn't read the message through and understand that the suggestion included the Argo material - he just saw "Baby Face Select" and responded the way he did, only thinking of the BN material.

FFA makes some good recommendations, to which I would add Brian Lynch. His records on Sharp Nine are all very fine, and he also did some nice work earlier on Criss Cross. The only Lynch album I've been disappointed in was on Cory Weed's label - that Canadian club I can't recall at the moment. It was with his "electric" group and has a sort of early 70s/fender rhodes/spacy feel to it. I think its what Lee Morgan might have recorded had he lived. But the rest of his work is very nice, if you like the modern mainstream/BN sound.

From what I can remember from various threads, someone keeps badgering Cuscuna and he keeps saying "effoff". I wouldn't say that's been his answer. Last time it was implied that the answer to the problem of having too many albums to go on a big Mosaic set is to do perhaps three Selects. I am betting that will be the result sometime in the future.

yeah, there "his" in the sense that he owns the reels ... but in the sense of owning the music contained is just

Jazz students must be the only ones buying cds nowadays.