ANDYTHECLOWN Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 Which is it.. gamble, or don't gamble..? Apparently you have a bit of trouble deciding.. ANDYTHECLOWN Posted on: Jul 28 2004, 01:18 PM Replies: 918 Views: 8,066 QUOTE ( @ Jul 28 2004, 08:17 PM) I doubt that and suppose that is an expression more of frustration than analysis. Exactly. Loiaza has trade value, and I wouldnt mind getting rid of him, and Diaz taking his spot. Take a gamble. what does Loiaza being traded have to do with taking the cheap way out, and gambling on a bunch of bums such as Politte and Jackson? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 You do that.... it effects you too. Oh crap Me :dips*** Is there a recall button on emails? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 what does Loiaza being traded have to do with taking the cheap way out, and gambling on a bunch of bums such as Politte and Jackson? Nothing. Specifically referring to your "gamble" comment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatchetman Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 There is no "rigid steadfast refusal to sign free agents". KW called Borass and found out all of the guys he was interested in were out of his price range. They tried to sign Omar and got outbid. We are 5 days into free agency, and just because we haven't signed someone yet, doesn't mean there is somekind of a Kennedyesque conspriracy to cover up the horrible truth. i thought we jointly concluded that the only FA of note signed in the past 8 years was navarro. that's a rigid steadfast refusal to sign free agents in my book. but i'm not going to argue about semantics. possibilities: polanco morris clement dye Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 i thought we jointly concluded that the only FA of note signed in the past 8 years was navarro. that's a rigid steadfast refusal to sign free agents in my book. but i'm not going to argue about semantics. possibilities: polanco morris clement dye That is quite a leap to conclusions you just made there... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanOfCorn Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 Okay, so is it "collusion" just when someone is nontendered? B/c then the club is saying that the player is not worth what he'll get in arbitration, suggesting to other clubs that he's not worth that much, etc. Collusion better mean a secret agreement, not a one-sided public announcement. Boras would scream about collusion if he thought it was there, but even he defended KW on the radio. No, non-tendering is not collusion. Let's say player A is non-tendered. Player A's former team isn't plotting with other owners to either a) sign this player cheaper or B) not sign him so they can sign him cheaper. You are letting that player go. Anyone can pay that player whatever they want. It could be more. Just like waivers. You can put a Manny Ramirez on waivers and ANYONE can pick him up if they are willing to take on the contract. But, when you are planting the idea that one agent overvalues the players he represents...that is bordering on collusion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatchetman Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 That is quite a leap to conclusions you just made there... oh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 You are letting that player go. Anyone can pay that player whatever they want. It could be more. This statement applies exactly to what KW did. I don't think this is even close to collusion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanOfCorn Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 This statement applies exactly to what KW did. I don't think this is even close to collusion. Sounds to me like Kenny is saying he won't sign ANY Boras clients BECAUSE they are overvalued. If the owners pick up on what he's saying and don't sign them because of it, that's collusion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WSFAN35 Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 Collusion: secret agreement or cooperation especially for an illegal or deceitful purpose In order for it to be collusion, all or most of the owners would have to be in cahoots to thwart Boras. Just because Kenny says that his players are overrpriced doesn't mean anything of the sort, and even if other owners don't wish to deal with Boras, it still doesn't mean collusion. There will always be suitors for Boras's players, by driving up his asking price, he's just weeding out those who aren't serious about spending money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanOfCorn Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 I understand what you are saying, but we are talking about the MLBPA. They aren't exactly the most forthright group out there. Anything to get Donald Fehr on TV and to thwart a salary cap, they will do. What I'm saying is that, KDub is talking when he shouldn't be...if nobody signs Boras clients to what Boras thinks they are worth, he's going to get in Fehr's ear and plant the seed of collusion. I'm not saying what KDub did is collusion...I'm saying that he's is giving the player's association some ammunition and he should shut up about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quickman Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 Yoo hoo.. over here.. AHHH me too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Honda Civic Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 Which is it.. gamble, or don't gamble..? Apparently you have a bit of trouble deciding.. ANDYTHECLOWN Posted on: Jul 28 2004, 01:18 PM Replies: 918 Views: 8,066 QUOTE ( @ Jul 28 2004, 08:17 PM) I doubt that and suppose that is an expression more of frustration than analysis. Exactly. Loiaza has trade value, and I wouldnt mind getting rid of him, and Diaz taking his spot. Take a gamble. PWNED Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted November 18, 2004 Share Posted November 18, 2004 If Jay was a poster here, you'd be praising him to the heavans for that post. If you build computers, you cannot tell Intel to go screw themelves, and if you want to win a WS you cannot tell the biggest agent in baseball to go screw himself. And as far as overbid/underbid, whenever you sign a free agent you overbid and all the other teams underbid. It's like an auction, the high bidder is the team that spends the most. Sometimes you guess right and the player turns out to be a bargain, other times you guess wrong and he's a dud. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted November 18, 2004 Author Share Posted November 18, 2004 When I said Moriatti had it right this time, I was talking about the call for JR to sell the team. He's had 25 years and still not even a sniff of a World Series. As far as Boras' clients are concerned .... they are all overpriced and wanting too many years. Just about every major long term contract has turned into one the team ends up regretting and trying to get out from under. Look at the proposed Sosa deal ..... Green, Sosa, Piazza, Floyd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnthraxFan93 Posted November 18, 2004 Share Posted November 18, 2004 Speaking of that Sosa/Floyd deal.. Why are tbe Mets going to do it? Why would would anyone want a riodsless Sosa? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg775 Posted November 19, 2004 Share Posted November 19, 2004 I think his negative stance toward the Sox is justified. I love the Sox but his column mentions our small market mentality. How can anybody deny that's a good thing to criticize. High market prices for tickets; low market mentality. And he wants Dork to sell the team. That's a good thing. This owner sucks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toasty Posted November 19, 2004 Share Posted November 19, 2004 If you build computers, you cannot tell Intel to go screw themelves I wholehartedly disagree... i use AMD! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.