Dec
28

Friday Night Open Thread

By

Here is your open thread for the evening. Both the Knicks and Nets are playing, but talk about whatever you like here. Have at it.

Categories : Open Thread

129 Comments»

  1. Chris says:

    How about Delmon Young as a DH. He kills us in the playoffs.

    • Need Pitching & Hitting says:

      and he usually kills the team he is on during the regular season…

      He does hit lefties well though, so maybe if they could get him on a minor league deal to compete with Diaz (if they can’t find a better solution).

    • Get Phelps Up says:

      He also had a sub .300 OBP last year, and is a terrible person off the field. No thanks.

      • whozat says:

        He’s also terrible when playing the field.

        He does one thing well: hit the Yankees in the playoffs. That is not a useful skillset when you are, in fact, playing for the Yankees.

      • Pat D says:

        Terrible person off the field? Can’t be. Homeless person killer Jackie Autry assured America he’s a “class act.”

    • The Mick the Man says:

      Think that would work as well as AJ. He killed us in 2008 before we signed him. Uhhhhhh…no,

  2. Luke says:

    What have we done to improve the lineup? It’s still the same group, only just a year older.

    • Need Pitching & Hitting says:

      It’s a weaker group, only just a year older.

    • Brian S. says:

      The lineup is worse than it was last year and it’s not particularly close. I think Granderson will have a better year but I expect Jeter and Ichiro to regress. The rotation should be as good. I think it will stay healthier than it did last year but I don’t expect Pettitte, Phelps, or Kuroda to have quite as good ERA’s this season. Nova and Hughes should do better in that regard. CC the same. The bullpen should also be better with Aardsma and Joba for a full year and hopefully Rivera can bounce back too.

      • Kevin Schappert says:

        Grandy won’t have a better year unless Tex and Cano have good years–batting 6th or 7th did not and won’t help Grandy–Yankee lineup was good until Aug. in ’12 then not good–BA could be better but overall about the same–tough to predict remember last years boys had a gazillion Ks not as much with Swish, Martin, and Ibanez gone–power isnt everything–in playoffs Ichiro had more RBIs than ARod, Tex, Swish and Cano combined–that’s sick

        • Get Phelps Up says:

          How is weather Granderson will have a better year related to what Tex and Cano do?

          • Brian S. says:

            Batting order obvs.

            • Ted Nelson says:

              So, it’s not related?

              • Brian S. says:

                Nope. Batting order does not have an impact on individual performance IMO.

                • Need Pitching & Hitting says:

                  I fear it might have an impact on Granderson.
                  Granderson does best against fastballs.
                  Granderson’s 2012 fastball % by month:
                  April – 50.5%
                  May – 52%
                  June – 54.7%
                  July – 49.6%
                  August – 46.2%
                  Sept/Oct – 45.7 %

                  Some of the decrease might be just due to his second half slump, but I’d imagine hitting lower in the lineup and with less protection may have contributed as well.

                  • Ted Nelson says:

                    Would like to see the FB% by lineup spot. Ps also might have noticed that he was doing more damage on FBs, seeing as we on a blog noticed.

                    • Need Pitching & Hitting says:

                      Granderson was even better against fastballs in 2011. I’d think that was already in the scouting report before this season.
                      I do think the slump, and Granderson’s seemingly poor pitch recognition during the slump, likely played a role. It would’t surprise me if lineup position played a role as well. If nothing else, I think that’s something the Yankees should keep an eye on if they decide to start the season with Granderson batting lower in the order.

      • Herby says:

        I actually expect Phelps to be better this year, and I do expect Tex and Cano to have better years. Jeter it’s hard to know what to expect coming off the injury, but I never count against him contributing a solid performance. If Gardner can give a healthy performance it’ll give a dimension to the offense that wasn’t there last year. Of course we all know Alex will come back in May and hit 50hrs by July.

    • Ted Nelson says:

      The same group that was 4 runs behind the MLB lead in runs scored? That group?

      • TomH says:

        Lord but you are predictable! Yes. he means exactly that same group, the already-one bunch that are now, as he pointed, another year older.

      • Brian S. says:

        With regular season downgrades at catcher and right field. I don’t think they will be second best again.

        • Ted Nelson says:

          Upgrades at DH, LF, and likely 1B (full season from Tex is likely). What close teams have particularly improved their offenses?

          • Brian S. says:

            Boston, Toronto, Los Angeles, and Detroit are other AL contenders who have an improved offense. I don’t see how we have an upgrade at DH until we have one of the roster, although no Andruw Jones is a step in the right direction.

            • MannyGeee says:

              How did Boston improve? By getting Victorino and a gimpy Napoli? Or the overachieving but rarely healthy Drew brother?

              Detroit improved, but only slightly (Hunter). LAA added Hamilton, so that is an upgrade for two seasons for sure… And we all know about the paper tiger that is the Blue Jays.

              • Need Pitching & Hitting says:

                Not sure LAA is necessarily better. Good chance 2012 Hunter/Morales was better than 2013 Hamilton/Bourjous will be. I suppose a full season of Trout and an acclimated Pujols might be enough to offset that difference though.

              • Brian S. says:

                Contract year Ellsbury, Ortiz and Pedroia coming back, Napoli, Drew, and David Ross are upgrades on what they had. I don’t think Victorino will help much.

                • Need Pitching & Hitting says:

                  Napoli isn’t likely to be an upgrade over AGon, but if they stay healthy, and in that ballpark, I can see the Red Sox possibly outscoring the Yankees. Yankees should still be top 5 in the AL though, and if they can add another solid everyday bat (someone like Morse)and stay relatively healthy, I could see the Yankees finishing in the top 1-2.

                • Robinson Tilapia says:

                  Everything will break the Sox way. Nothing will break the Yankees’ way. Gotcha.

            • Ted Nelson says:

              Youkilis is the upgrade at DH. A-Rod is out 1-3 months. Not all season at this point, and he missed a good chunk of last season as well.

              Angels were the best of those offenses, and were 40 runs behind the Yankees. BJs were 90 runs behind. Sox were 70. Tigers 80.

              With the Rangers likely taking a step back, I wouldn’t bet on the Yankees falling too far.

            • Get Phelps Up says:

              Boston is an AL contender?

              • Brian S. says:

                For the Wild Card I do believe so. I don’t think they are as good as New York, Tampa, or Toronto however, but they could be a mid 80 win team with a lot of other teams including us.

                • Get Phelps Up says:

                  Their pitching is really what would concern me. Lester was not very good last year, Dempster wasn’t good in the AL, John Lackey is John Lackey, and Doubront is coming off a season where he pitched by far the most innings of his career.

    • Kevin G. says:

      Gardner’s coming back. He makes this offense a lot less one-dimensional

  3. Austin Aunelowitzky says:

    When is Alphonso joining the cause?

  4. Jimmy Page says:

    I hope they do not sign Scott Hairston. He stinks. Trade for Justin Upton or Jason Kubel.

  5. ken says:

    THE YANKEES WILL HAVE 3 OF THE FIRST 35 PICKS IN JUNE DRAFT. ANY PREFERENCE?

  6. paul a says:

    YEAH,ANYBODY WHO MARK NEWMAN DOSN’T PICK

    • Ted Nelson says:

      Damon Oppenheimer runs the draft. And it’s hard to argue that he does a bad job.

      • Brian S. says:

        Meh. Some questionable decisions early in the draft but I actually really like our farm more than most people do.

        • Ted Nelson says:

          If a decision doesn’t work out it’s questionable?

          • Steve says:

            Culver was a terrible pick at the time and continues to be terrible. Bichette was also an incredible stretch and everybody knew it and talked about it. So I call bullshit on this comment

            • Ted Nelson says:

              How many times you see either of those guys play in HS?

              • Milt Toast says:

                He went to scouting school with Keith Law. They had lunch together every day at the Dairy Queen across the causeway.

              • Need Pitching & Hitting says:

                So by your standard, no pick any MLB team ever makes is questionable because they had thought it was the right pick?

                • Ted Nelson says:

                  Thanks for putting words in my mouth.

                  Questionable is a totally subjective thing. Every team makes picks that don’t work out. If you’ve done enough scouting before hand, you can call them questionable. The line between reach and undiscovered gem is very, very thin, though. One example of that is Joey Votto. The Yankees and Reds are rumored to be the only teams seriously scouting him. Had the Yankees had a pick to take him before the Reds, people on here probably would have freaked out. Some Canadian in the first? They could have taken Player X who Journalist Y loved! And then the Yankees would have had the best hitter in baseball… Culver and DBJ were also part of a draft strategy that basically allowed the Yankees two guys they thought were first round talents when they later threw $ at Williams and Bird.

                  • Need Pitching & Hitting says:

                    Of course it’s subjective. That’s what I meant by my previous reply. By that standard, no pick could ever be considered questionable. Someone can always make the excuse that they though they had found some hidden gem.

                    Also, there was no draft cap in place for Bichette or Culver. They could have drafted different players and still subsequently drafted Williams and Bird. Being part of some perceived strategy doesn’t exempt it from being considered a questionable pick.

                    • Ted Nelson says:

                      Instead of making up what my standard is, read what I wrote. I literally said that if you actually know something anout the prospects aside from someone else’s opinion. Sure, question it. Simply guessing whether someone is a reach or diamond in the rough based on where BA ranked him is for fools.

                      So you believe that Damon Oppenheimer sets te draft budget? I do not.

                    • Need Pitching & Hitting says:

                      I don’t either. It’s pure speculation to say whether Culver and/or Bichette were because of budget or other reasons.

                      Simply guessing whether someone is a reach or diamond in the rough based on where BA ranked him is for fools.

                      I agree BA rankings aren’t the be all/end all of anything, but they are about as close to an expert opinion as a typical fan has to go on for amateur players. In any case here, I’d assume somebody calling a player a questionable pick would be basing it on the opinions of others who have actually seen that player, and not their personal observations of potential draft picks. If draft experts call a pick questionable, wouldn’t it be fair for a casual fan to consider that pick to be possibly questionable as well?

                    • Ted Nelson says:

                      I don’t think it is, no, because draft experts are wrong the majority of the time. If Opp “reaches” for someone with similar pre-draft rankings who works out, that guy was a “diamond in the rough.” If the guy doesn’t work out, it was a “questionable” pick. If you haven’t even seen the guy play, you are just shooting in the dark.

                      Once you get past maybe 25 guys, I’m not sure there’s much correlation between BA rankings and pro success.

                      And any pick is possibly questionable. You can find reasons to question just about any pick. If it’s not even based on your own analysis, I don’t really care that you question it.

                    • Ted Nelson says:

                      And I just wouldn’t judge a talent evaluator on any one pick, either. You can take a risk that would work out enough to make it worth it, and you’ll still be wrong a certain % of the time. In the MLB draft outside the top 20 or so, that’s probably going to be a high %.

                      If every pick Opp made turned out like Culver has so far, I would not defend him. He’s had a whole lot of good picks, though. The Culver draft itself could even go down as his best with Austin, Mason, and Gumbs among others.

                      If it is a relevant metric, other BA top 200 guys he got that year included: Culver, Segedin, Encinas, Burawa, and Rutckyj. 7 is about what you’d expect a team to get.

              • Steve says:

                I actually saw Culver quite a bit in high school, as I am from Rochester. But I’m not talking about me, I’m talking about guys like my high school buddy Keith Law who all said from the very moment that these idiots were drafted that they were awful picks. And what do you know? They were right!

                • Henry Krinkle says:

                  Didn’t you say you’re a fan of another team? If so,
                  which one?

                • CW says:

                  Didn’t you say you’re a fan of another team?If so, which one?

                • Ted Nelson says:

                  Keith Law is wrong about the draft far, far more than he is right. So are most people. Going on his opinion is not going to get you any better results than the actual draft. If it were going to get you better results, how much do you want to bet he’d have a job for an actual MLB team? (If he had a track record in print of being a far better talent evaluator than Opp, say, why wouldn’t the Yankees pay him handsomely to take Opp’s job?) Take a look at BA’s top 200 prospect rankings historically, and the results are no better than the draft.

                    • Ted Nelson says:

                      My point was clearly not that he cannot get any job with any team. (Which either you knew or you’re not very bright. And being sought after by the Astros is not really a complement, by the way… they are the worst run team in MLB by a wide margin.) I used taking Opp’s job on the Yankees as a convenient example because this is a Yankees blog. My point is that the draft is very volatile and that if he has some incredible skill-set or system that allows him to judge amateur talent better than MLB teams collectively, he’d be a very rich man with every MLB team knocking down his door. I am not knocking Law at all. He doesn’t even specialize on the draft or have enough resources to get a good feel for all these kids. I am saying that he is no more talented at this than most MLB decision makers. That he didn’t like a pick means very, very little. It’s one opinion. He’s wrong an awful lot, and that’s not a knock on him.

          • Brian S. says:

            Brackman, Bittle, Bleich, that one relief pitcher that needed surgery that we didnt sign (Samford?), Culver, DBJ, were all questionable decisions at the time if I recall correctly. The organization has a lot more information on these players than we do but at the same time these picks were not highly regarded at the time.

            • Ted Nelson says:

              So it is that everyone who doesn’t work out is questionable? You’re all over the place there. The consensus best talent (Brackman) is questionable. A safe NCAA guy (Bleich) who gets injured is questionable. A LH STARTING P who threw like triple digits or something is questionable, even though they didn’t even sign him and were able to carry the pick forward. A HS guy the media disagrees with is questionable, even when it’s part of a draft strategy to get cheap talent there to sign a Mason Williams or Greg Bird later.

              The only theme there is that they didn’t (or haven’t) worked out.

              • Milt Toast says:

                But every other team’s first round picks have worked out beautifully for decades. Only the Yankees have made stupid picks. Stupid Yankees.

              • Ted Nelson says:

                *Stafford

              • Brian S. says:

                I actually like the way we draft in the rounds past three but I am routinely disappointed to see talent in the compensation rounds turn into all-stars while we select first round bust after first round bust. Why were we going cheap in the first round of 2010 only to see Aaron Sanchez, Noah Syndergaard, Taijuan Walker, Nick Castellanos, Tyrell Jenkins and Mike Olt get drafted within eighteen picks after Culver?

                And again, I think we have one of the better farm systems in the league so I’m not trying to be too critical of the Yankees front office.

                • Ted Nelson says:

                  Everyone makes mistakes. I am
                  Not arguing that the Yankees are the best drafting team let alone perfect.

                  Fixating on one pick and then stretching it to three rounds for no reason at all (lots of good top 3 round picks for Opp) is silly. They thought Culver would develop into a starting SS. So far ot looks like they were wrong. It happens.

                • Ted Nelson says:

                  Also, I doubt Opp sets the draft budget. He could have grabbed on of those guys you wanted, and that might have cost him Mason Williams. Williams is comparable to about any of those guys right now.

                  That is not an Opp issue, IMO. We are discussing Opp. Not blindly getting mad at everything that goes wrong.

                • Ted Nelson says:

                  To illustrate my point, I’ll use the Olt example. If the Yankees took Olt (who BA had ranked 98th that year), fans on here probably don’t react much better than to Culver. The Yankees got #102 and #88 the next two rounds, and people weren’t jumping for joy that I recall. Those people would look wrong right now (and even if the guy doesn’t work out, he’s got trade value). The Yankees did take a 3B who was #108 the next year, and people did freak out. If the Yankees took Mason Williams (145) or Tyler Austin (unranked) in the first people probably would have freaked out, “questioned it,” but the pick would look very good right now.

                  People would have called Olt a questionable pick, yet it would have been better than a lot of consensus picks.

                  Same would be the case to a lesser extent with Walker (70) or Sanchez (59).

                  • Robinson Tilapia says:

                    When the guys don’t pan out, it’s questionable. When they do, it’s genius……or Andrew Friedman.

                    • Andy Pettitte's Fibula says:

                      So I guess no pick the Yankees make can ever be questionable? It works both ways.

                      The nature of the draft is the vast majority of prospect don’t make it and overall I think the Yankees probably do a better job drafting than a lot of other teams.

                      That doesn’t mean however that some of the Yankees high draft picks like Culver and Bichette that were felt to be major reaches by people in the business, not just us casual fans, weren’t poor and/or questionable picks. There’s no shame in admitting that. I’d bet that even Cashman would admit as much.

                    • Ted Nelson says:

                      I’ve gone into great depth on this above, but the difference between a “questionable” pick and a “diamond in the rough” is not something you can figure out from BA rankings of Law’s quips. They are going to call some picks questionable just because they didn’t have the resources to properly scout the guy, and others because they legitimately didn’t like what they saw. Still others because they had some subjective dislike for a guy (say his athleticism or his size) that made them bias against him: see a host of successes like Youkilis, Cano (not drafted, but passed over by a lot of teams for his lack of speed at 2B), Pedroia…

                      I will bet you a billion dollars that Cashman would not call Bichette a questionable pick. Though fans on here freak out about it because Keith Law didn’t like the pick, he was ranked all of 10 spots below where Olt was ranked the year before by BA and I don’t hear anyone still questioning the Rangers for taking Olt at #49. It’s very common for teams to disagree with BA and Law and whoever else, it’s not just the Yankees. The Rays do it and they’re geniuses or value conscious, but if the Yankees do it the same “fans” who think the Yankees should be more like the Rays flip out. Bichette struggled in full-season ball his first full pro season, but that doesn’t mean he’s not a prospect anymore.

                      I would also bet the same for Culver, though not as much… they took a risk that he was a cold weather guy who would blossom as a pro, and have been wrong so far.

                      If I make you a list of all the “questionable” picks who worked out, it would be very, very long. In Culver’s own draft class, a lot of people questioned the pick that has been the most successful to date: Chris Sale.

                      If you go on BA or Law, you’re going to call a whole lot of picks “questionable.” The draft is too wide open to question picks based on some perceived media consensus.

                    • Ted Nelson says:

                      Basically, Fibula… if we are using BA’s rankings as a credible source, what makes Olt a very good pick at 49 and Bichette a questionable one at 51? 10 spots from 98 to 108 in their rankings?

                      Why is the media more efficient at evaluating amateur baseball talent than professional talent evaluators? Have you looked at BA’s rankings or anyone else’s vs. the actual draft to see if they out-perform or under-perform the market?

                    • Andy Pettitte's Fibula says:

                      I appreciate your point but by your reasoning, no pick could ever be questioned by fans and media since we could never have direct inside knowledge as to each teams draft data.

                      I think people like Keith Law and BA have enough information about the draft pool that they can call into question some picks while maintinaing good credibility. Sure they’re gonna be wrong often but not 100% of the time and they very well may have been right about Culver. I’m leaving out Bichette because I haven’t given up on him yet.

                      From what I recall, the Culver pick was universally panned by those outside of the Yankees organization as a major reach by those with the best working knowledge of the draft and his lack of development so far only serves to validate that IMO.

                    • Ted Nelson says:

                      They can question any and every pick. So can you. That doesn’t make it a questionable pick.

                      Where we disagree is the accuracy of these draft predictors. Look through historic BA draft rankings. They are terrible after somewhere in the 20-50 range. Very little accuracy. Much like the draft itself. My main argument is that these media guys are not any better at this on average than the MLB guys doing it.

                      They pan a ton of picks that work out, as well as a ton that don’t. If you were to pan every pick after the top 20 of the draft, you’d have a really high rate of success… because most of them aren’t going to work out.

  7. Heisenberg says:

    Hard to argue he does a bad job? What have they produced?

    • TomH says:

      You don’t understand: Nelson is RAB’s official homer. Any insinuation that the Yankees are less than A++, whether on the field or in the front office, is greeted by an immediate denial. The only way you could get him to be less than Pollyanna-on-steroids is by drugging him with KGB truth serum. In its way, it has a kind of naive charm.

      • Cris Pengiucci says:

        Granted, Ted is more optimistic than most, but look at where the Yankees drafted and look at what has turned out. (Phil, Joba, IPK, Austin Jackson, Gardner, Robertson, etc.) It’s difficult to find any teams that consistently turn draft picks into usable MLB pieces and when you look at where the teams that seem to have a good track record drafted compared to the Yankees, yeah I agree with Ted. Hard to argue he’s done a bad job.

      • Robinson Tilapia says:

        It’s our nighltly edition of “get personal with Ted, then claim he did it first.”

      • Ted Nelson says:

        Your ignorance is showing again

    • whozat says:

      Austin Jackson, Ian Kennedy, Phil Hughes, David Robertson, and Joba Chamberlain, right off the top of my head.

      • Dalek Jeter (formerly: Raul Ibanez AKA Tom Marvolo Riddle AKA True Yankee(TM)) says:

        You also forgot Phelps, Nova, and Montero. All of which are young/unproven. Two of which had decent years this past year, one of which is a year removed from a decent year. Also, in the minors, again, unproven they have the likes of Sanchez, Williams, Austin, Bichette Jr, and Heathcott on the offensive side with Hensley, Campos, Banuelos, and Montgomery on the pitching side. I guarantee at least 2 of them become regular major leaguers at some point. Finally, everybody’s newest favorite whipping boy, Austin Romine, is only two years removed from being a top 100 prospect (in all of baseball)

        • whozat says:

          Sure, I know about those guys, but we were talking specifically about the draft, I thought. Also, I was trying to just cite the guys that I think we can all agree are at least successful major leaguers — which is really all you can expect from the draft when you never pick higher than about 28.

      • Horizonal Pinstripe says:

        Dante Jr and that lame SS from Rochester.

      • Need Pitching & Hitting says:

        Also Gardner.

      • Get Phelps Up says:

        Cano and Wang too.

    • Ted Nelson says:

      That you have to ask is evidence that you are ignorant on the subject. Check out their draft results relative to other teams and you’ll be surprised. People flip out about one first round bust, and ignore all the good picks.

      Play around on here and you’ll start to figure it out: http://www.baseball-reference.com/draft/

  8. Dalek Jeter (formerly: Raul Ibanez AKA Tom Marvolo Riddle AKA True Yankee(TM)) says:

    Man, this is the second Friday in a row that RAB has informed me it’s Friday…

  9. Blake says:

    Be pretty cool if the Yanks could do that deal Bowden made up (Mason, Sanchez, Dante for Justin Upton) …..then flip Granderson for Olt.

    The Yanks would have two young players to build around and would also still have Heathcott and Austin.

    Of course the likelihood of all that is like 0.001 %….but one can dream

    • Brian S. says:

      Arizona might actually do that trade. No way Texas trades six years of Olt for one year of Granderson though.

      • Blake says:

        Olt is blocked and they have made him pretty available …..they need LH power to replace Hamilton so I think they’d have interest in Grandy…..Yanks might have to kick in a bit more but there could be a match if the two teams will deal together.

        Olt is a good prospect but he’s not projected as a star type….he’s got some warts….which is probably why his name keeps getting thrown around.

        I don’t know if Arizona would do that or not….I kinda think the Yanks would need to add at least one major leaguer to the deal

        • Tony_Turdner says:

          JMO, but I do not really see either of those deals as realistic.

          First, Arizona is probably going to want a bit more back for J. Upton than three A ball players. Yes, Sanchez & Mason are high potential prospects. But both are far, far away from being MLB players. Both split time last year between Low-A & High-A ball. Neither may ever make it to the show. Lots of high ranking guys never make it past AA. Bichette is just a throw in at this point. Yes, NYY would need to add at least one MLB player to the deal. Maybe more. Not sure where Bowden dreams this stuff up, but I am betting Towers got a huge laugh out of it.

          As was stated above, I don’t think there is anyway Texas trades six years of Olt for one year of Granderson. As for Olt not being a top prospect, he is ranked second in Texas’ system (right behind overall #1 uber-prospect Profar) and #16 overall, a lot higher than either Sanchez or Mason. Yes he is blocked at 3B by Beltre for a few more years which is why he is name has been floated this winter. But it would probably take a lot more than a one year rental of Granderson to get a deal done.

          • Ted Nelson says:

            I don’t know what trades teams will and won’t make, but I think you are overrating the jump from High A to AAA compared to the jump from AAA to MLB.

            One bad season after an aggressive promotion your first year after HS also doesn’t make you a throw in. Bichette is still a prospect.

    • Dalek Jeter (formerly: Raul Ibanez AKA Tom Marvolo Riddle AKA True Yankee(TM)) says:

      Personally, as much as I would love to have Olt for the future, I feel like he’d be a step back for this season in return for a few steps forward in 2014 and beyond. The biggest problem I have with that is w/ the 2014 budget looming large this may be our last chance of being a “sure bet for the playoffs” type of team. I’m not saying that we can’t/won’t make the playoffs in 2014 and 2015 just that after this season we’re going to see Mo, Kuroda, and Pettitte leave as well as probably Granderson, Youkilis, and Hughes with the possibility of Jeter and Cano as well. Sure that’s a lot of money coming off the books, but it’s also a lot of talent as well.

      • Andy Pettitte's Fibula says:

        Yeah I think the 2013 Yankees can make a strong run for #28 and I’d rather see them load up rather than take a step back.

    • MannyGeee says:

      Dear Mr Bowden:

      If you were any good at this “fair value for superstar trading” thing, youd probably still be running a team instead of making shit up for MLBN…. Your trade proposal sucks.

      regards

      M to da Geee

  10. Travis L. says:

    Mets need bullpen help…if we dangle Joba and Logan, is there anything they have that could help us out? I know losing them would POSSIBLY set the bullpen back, but I’d gamble on Cabral/Spence/Cedeno to take over for Logan, and possibly Whitley/Miller/Claiborne/Perez/Random Free Agent to cover Joba’s spot.
    What do you guys think of Dillon Gee or Wilmer Flores (prospect SS)

    • Blake says:

      Can’t see the mets giving up any good prospects for bullpen help when they aren’t close to winning…..Id love to have Wilmer but they have very little incentive to move him

    • Robinson Tilapia says:

      It’s all in how you phrase it. Tell Alderson it’s Dillon Gee for FUTURE METS CLOSER BOONE LOGAN.

  11. Nathan says:

    Ah David Justice…one of my favorites from my teenage years.

Leave a Reply

You may use <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> in your comment.

If this is your first time commenting on River Ave. Blues, please review the RAB Commenter Guidelines. Login for commenting features. Register for RAB.