Internal alternatives to Avisail Garcia

[LDF]

The fact that you aren't even willing to list a FA and compare them statistically to Laroche is all anyone needs to see, you're arguing just to argue and have no ground to stand on here.

 

nor will the other person do the same to disprove what i was saying.

 

btw, my point was, the bulls had a chance to fix this up, before st and didn't. who cares of the cost being over 129 mil.

 

there were uncertainties, going into st, will avi rebound or can rebound, esp with his new stance. can laroche rebound from last yr abysmal hitting???

 

the sox never fully fix those holes. and my point is and will always be, b/c the owners are too cheap. they will go the cheapest route.

 

this was not the yr to do this, this team is too good.

 

now, those who were posting against me, was trying to divert the subject.

 

those holes were before the st started.

[lasttriptotulsa]

nor will the other person do the same to disprove what i was saying.

 

btw, my point was, the bulls had a chance to fix this up, before st and didn't. who cares of the cost being over 129 mil.

 

there were uncertainties, going into st, will avi rebound or can rebound, esp with his new stance. can laroche rebound from last yr abysmal hitting???

 

the sox never fully fix those holes. and my point is and will always be, b/c the owners are too cheap. they will go the cheapest route.

 

this was not the yr to do this, this team is too good.

 

now, those who were posting against me, was trying to divert the subject.

 

those holes were before the st started.

 

They made an attempt to sign Cespedes, Gordon and Upton. How in the f*** is that going the cheapest route. You are just completely wrong on this and no matter how many times you repeat it it's not going to make it true. Remember, it's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt.

[LDF]

They made an attempt to sign Cespedes, Gordon and Upton. How in the f*** is that going the cheapest route. You are just completely wrong on this and no matter how many times you repeat it it's not going to make it true. Remember, it's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt.

 

this is a hoot, words of wisdom from you. get real.

 

they made an attempt, but didn't sign any of those fa. so what were the salary at that time???

 

and as anyone really don't know, how close they were to signing them, esp at the salary the players received.

 

making assumption without any credible proof.... really nice to cherry pick a discussion.

[Kyyle23]

this is a hoot, words of wisdom from you. get real.

 

they made an attempt, but didn't sign any of those fa. so what were the salary at that time???

 

and as anyone really don't know, how close they were to signing them, esp at the salary the players received.

 

making assumption without any credible proof.... really nice to cherry pick a discussion.

 

Rich, and compelling

[LDF]

Rich, and compelling

 

it should be, that what you and the other person always do.

 

i am just following my faithful leaders.

[LDF]

http://www.royalsreview.com/2016/3/14/1121...ion-with-royals

 

ok, i never said that it wasn't true, and the debate was after that, the sox still had the chance to improve . now look at how long it took for the sox to sign a jacks.

 

furthermore, the sox still had a chance, when they didn't sign any of the big 3-4, to still sign someone who can or may platoon with the dh.

 

signing or not signing is really not the debate. quit changing the goalline.

 

the debate is, the owners didn't want to pony up to get a dh, before st started.

 

if you know craps, the key word is betting on the come.

 

anything else is pure attempt to position the discussion in one favor.

[Bigsoxhurt35]

I wouldn't call the Sox cheap at all. Theve had a high payroll considering the teams they trotted out there. They're not like the Rays.

[southsider2k5]

ok, i never said that it wasn't true, and the debate was after that, the sox still had the chance to improve . now look at how long it took for the sox to sign a jacks.

 

furthermore, the sox still had a chance, when they didn't sign any of the big 3-4, to still sign someone who can or may platoon with the dh.

 

signing or not signing is really not the debate. quit changing the goalline.

 

the debate is, the owners didn't want to pony up to get a dh, before st started.

 

if you know craps, the key word is betting on the come.

 

anything else is pure attempt to position the discussion in one favor.

 

They had a DH before Spring Training started. He quit.

[Kyyle23]

Proof is not proof.

[LDF]

I wouldn't call the Sox cheap at all. Theve had a high payroll considering the teams they trotted out there. They're not like the Rays.

 

and for my opinion, it was to keep faith in the fans,. to show they are spending money, so they can get the fans to buy into this and buy tickets.

 

it is not like i am asking the sox to spend over 150 mil.

 

 

[LDF]

They had a DH before Spring Training started. He quit.

 

and like i didn't know that,

 

the point is, to get an additional player who can platoon, someone who in all likely hood be better then what they had.

[Bigsoxhurt35]

and for my opinion, it was to keep faith in the fans,. to show they are spending money, so they can get the fans to buy into this and buy tickets.

 

it is not like i am asking the sox to spend over 150 mil.

Well let's see what they do at the trade deadline, and in the offseason with LaRoche already off the books and Danks coming off.

[southsider2k5]

and like i didn't know that,

 

the point is, to get an additional player who can platoon, someone who in all likely hood be better then what they had.

 

You just said in your previous post that they needed a DH before Spring Training.

[LDF]

Well let's see what they do at the trade deadline, and in the offseason with LaRoche already off the books and Danks coming off.

 

and i agree, i said in the beginning, lets see where things are at the end of may, beginning of june.

 

 

[LDF]

You just said in your previous post that they needed a DH before Spring Training.

 

well, when the sox were trying to trade him, even go so far to eat maybe 3/4 of his last yr salary, i would thnk that the writing is on the wall, they really had no faith in him.

 

you tell me.

 

nah for get that, you will still argue that the owners spent enuf money as your common theme

[southsider2k5]

well, when the sox were trying to trade him, even go so far to eat maybe 3/4 of his last yr salary, i would thnk that the writing is on the wall, they really had no faith in him.

 

you tell me.

 

nah for get that, you will still argue that the owners spent enuf money as your common theme

 

Sounds like someone is making assumptions...

 

[LDF]

So basically you don't even believe your own point, and are just arguing to argue.

 

All you do is b**** and moan about ownership, form incoherent sentence structure trying to make a point no one agrees with, all the while the team is 7-2 and has 13 million dollars to possibly invest in this team at a later date, which has been confirmed in print and radio by big bad ownership.

 

You don't even know what side to argue anymore.

 

not really and why am i the only one to be called out on this, when others were saying to get rid of avi.

 

ref #1, sentence structure, well, i have apologize some many time for my lack of english skills. and i went to some many english classes to improve. this is my bad on this. God didn't see fit to allow me to improve.

 

ref #2. i b**** and moan about the owners not doing or spending what is needed to field the team at the same time b**** and moan about fans not coming out.

 

this yr record, notwithstanding, shouldn't even be in this discussion. b/c i believe in this team and have stated so.

 

what i do not believe in is going into the season with 1 major hole at DH, get another fa to platoon and be that 25th person, someone like looney or murph to name but 2.

 

ref #3, when i am defending myself against 2, it is hard to keep tabs, but it is also a cheap way to pick and choose certain points and take them out of contents to make a point.

[LDF]

Sounds like someone is making assumptions...

 

 

you do it allllll the time.... man up.

[GreenSox]

Sands/Shuck and then Avi (maybe).

And after Dunn, Laroche and 2 weeks of Frazier, if people think trading young players for yet another NL slugger w/ severe splits who rakes in his home hitters' park is the answer, I don't know what to say.

Edited April 14, 2016 by GreenSox

[LDF]

Sands/Shuck and then Avi (maybe).

And after Dunn, Laroche and 2 weeks of Frazier, if people think trading young players for yet another NL slugger w/ severe splits who rakes in his home hitters' park is the answer, I don't know what to say.

 

i am still waiting for 2 nl team to try a salary dump. but who knows.

[ChiSox59]

Sands/Shuck and then Avi (maybe).

And after Dunn, Laroche and 2 weeks of Frazier, if people think trading young players for yet another NL slugger w/ severe splits who rakes in his home hitters' park is the answer, I don't know what to say.

 

You would give up on Frazier after 30 ABs, since sample sizes mean nothing to you.

[LDF]

You would give up on Frazier after 30 ABs, since sample sizes mean nothing to you.

 

oops i didn't take his comment as a neg against the sox.

 

i was wrong if he did.

[Kyyle23]

i am still waiting for 2 nl team to try a salary dump. but who knows.

 

A salary dump, 2 weeks into the season. Alrighty

[LDF]

A salary dump, 2 weeks into the season. Alrighty

 

there are 2 teams in the nl that were trying to trade high salary players on their payroll.

 

again cherry picking to start a rant.

 

nice try

[LDF]

But this makes absolutely zero sense, I just can't comprehend how you can't grasp that.

 

You're core complaint seems to be about ownership not spending to make this team better. We've established that's nor really true, but even if it was, the team has shown over the 1st two weeks to be a competitive team is currently 1st in the division. Why SHOULD they have spent more money in the off-season when it looks like the 25 man is working just fine? You can't possibly justify just throwing out the record. You also can't because if the team was 2-7, your argument would be much more valid. The team at that point would clearly need more help and should have been addressed in the off-season.

 

and yet you posted about the sox getting or trying to get one of the top 3-4 fa's. also it was well documented that the sox tried to trade laroche be the trading deadline last season.

 

so getting a player, who may be a better option than what the sox have avail is the thought process, b/c the owners will not spend that money.

 

if the sox really wanted one of the key Fa's, then outbid all the teams.

 

and ref to the bold, i have and did addressed it many times. and i still stand by what i have been saying then as, as i am doing now.