Lookout Landing: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:



Around SBN: Phillies trade for OF Matt Stairs Bar-right-arrows



So, Okay

I'm basically at the point right now where I'm treating the Bedard trade as an inevitability. I'm convinced that, before long, Erik Bedard will be a Mariner, and Adam Jones, George Sherrill, and some other people will not. I don't have an inside source leading me in one direction or the other, but at least this way, if it happens, I'll be prepared, and if it doesn't, I'll be ecstatic. That's how the experienced loser deals with dejection.

Obviously, this trade is all the rage. Every Mariner fan with an Internet connection is talking about it, and it's been analyzed and evaluated from every angle imaginable. There is little to say about this deal that hasn't already been said, which is kind of remarkable considering it hasn't happened yet. The Mariner community is nothing if not thorough.

With that in mind, there's one thing that's bothering me in a lot of the current discussion. It's not that some people are underselling the impact of defense - that's pretty much always the case. It's not that some people are willing to sacrifice a chunk of the future to win now - that's understandable. And it's not that some people are ignoring the value of Jones' low salary - it's tough to make people care about money when all you see are the players on the field.

It's the fascination that some people have with labels. Bedard, the #1 ace pitcher. Jones, the average corner bat. Sherrill, the LOOGY. And so on and so forth. A typical argument will be that "Bedard is a #1 ace pitcher, and there aren't many of those around, so you have to seize the opportunity to get one while you can."

This point (or some variation thereof) is being repeated everywhere as justification for making the trade. And if you just give it a casual glance, it makes sense - #1 starters are rare, and therefore extraordinarily valuable, because whatever you trade to get one is more easy to replace than the pitcher himself, who has few peers. In a way, this is sort of the whole basis of the stars and scrubs approach to roster management.

Well, for one thing, while #1 pitchers are indeed incredibly rare, so are highly talented outfielders under cheap team control for the next six years. Right now, Adam Jones has fewer comparables than Erik Bedard.

But more importantly, let's drop the labels entirely. Yes, Erik Bedard is a #1 pitcher. That's great. Just don't let that fact cloud your judgment.

Every single player in baseball can be described by two values - the number of runs he contributes to his team, and how much he costs. Every single one. There's no need for labels when it comes to serious analysis. Instead of saying something like "Erik Bedard is valuable because he's an ace," it's better to say "Erik Bedard is valuable because he's x runs better than (other pitcher), and won't cost that much in terms of money." It paints a more accurate and specific picture that makes for easier evaluation than trying to navigate between a bunch of flattering, imprecise adjectives.

In the case of the current Mariners, you can't just rationalize a trade for Bedard by saying that he's an ace, and that we need an ace something terrible. You need to work with the numbers. Let's forget about salary for a moment. Bedard is likely to be, I dunno, anywhere between 30-40 (edit: 40-50) runs better than whoever else we'd end up plugging into that final rotation spot. That's a huge improvement in the team's overall run differential, one that would make us a handful of wins better as a team.

Now subtract from that total of 40-50 however many runs you think we lose going from Sherrill to somebody else. Then subtract however many runs you think we lose going from Jones to another RF at the plate (if any). Finally, subtract however many runs you think we lose going from Jones to another RF in the field. What number are you left with?

In order to properly evaluate this trade, you need to look at three things:

(1) the size of that number in 2008 and, if you're feeling adventurous, 2009 (the improvement in run differential)
(2) how much closer that brings us to the upper tier of the AL
(3) whether an improvement of that magnitude is worth giving up six years of Jones, four years of Sherrill, and six years of whoever else you give up

I'll let you make up your own mind about what you'd prefer to have happen, but if you want to analyze this trade, that's how you have to look at it. Any other approach, particularly one that draws heavily upon the appeal of having Bedard/Felix at the front, is incomplete. Yes, that would be an awesome pair to have. But would it be awesome enough to justify the expense?

My personal belief is that, no, it wouldn't. If we were about five wins better or so, in a position where adding Bedard could put us over the top, then yeah, it'd make sense to overpay. But I don't think we're there, not yet, not without an inordinate number of good bounces going in our favor. And I think we're unlikely to get there in the next few years unless we hang on to the very talent that we're on the verge of trading away.

0 recs | Comment 191 comments

Story-email Email | Print |

Comments

Display:

The number is small.
This trade is stupid.

by Matthew on Jan 14, 2008 5:00 PM PST   0 recs

Can we just call that a "win"
and be done?
Prospects are under-valued.

by Thingray on Jan 14, 2008 5:10 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

I wonder what that number looks like in
3 years
I fucking hate you Mariners

by kentroyals5 on Jan 14, 2008 5:10 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

Aces
I don't get the "Gotta have a #1 starter" argument.  Never have, never will.  The only time that label matters is on Opening Day; the rest of the time, it's just five guys out there pitching.  Sure, some are better than others, and I want the M's to get the best pitcher they can, but the fact that so many people are fixated on whether the M's "get an ace" scares me, especially if it costs a significant chunk of the farm to do so.
Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.

by pdb on Jan 14, 2008 5:15 PM PST   0 recs

That reminds me
of the mantra of the last couple years where the M's absolutely needed a middle of the order lefty bat to fit Safeco....

by MfaninAlaska on Jan 14, 2008 5:17 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

Having a legit #1 is necessary
when you reach the playoffs. But for now it would make a lot more sense for the M's to worry about making it that far to begin with.

by Katal LM on Jan 14, 2008 5:20 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

Yeah
Bedard/Felix (if Felix finally goes nuts like we hope) would be dynamite in October. But I don't think we're really in a position where we can be planning for that quite yet.

by Jeff on Jan 14, 2008 5:23 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

Slightly disagree
Having two very good pitchers is necessary in the playoffs.  Whether those two pitchers are "aces" or just guys on hot streaks (Hello 2007 Rockies!) is almost immaterial.
Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.

by pdb on Jan 14, 2008 5:23 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

true dat
but it's hard to count on anyone going on a hot streak at just the right time. At least you (probably) know what you're getting with an ace.

by Katal LM on Jan 14, 2008 5:25 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

CC Sabathia
Jose Vidro (DH - Ms) was arrested today in an Idaho Bathroom for having a wide stance and sucking.

by Librocrat on Jan 14, 2008 5:26 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

why do the o's demanding sherrill
why would they demand a 30 year old reliever when they are trying to rebuild. I can understand wanting him if he was young but how is he gonna help them a few years from now. On sherrill being in the deal i dont mind him, he wasnt very good in the second half so maybe hitters are finally catching up to him and the thing about relievers is except for the top relievers like putz, papelbon etc... most relievers change how good they are from year to year, alot of relievers are awesome one year and suck the next for example scott linebrink he was awesome last year and was not very good this year. The padres except for hoffman get new relievers every year and they are always awesome like heath bell he sucked on the mets but was dominant this year.

by rturk89 on Jan 14, 2008 5:46 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

Just because they are rebuilding, doesn't
mean they won't take a good reliever when they can. Sherrill instantly becomes their best reliever and probably their closer by default.

And yeah, he wasn't as good in the 2nd half as he was the first half, but he was still pretty good overall, not to mention we're talking about 17 innings here.

These pretzels....are making me thirsty!

by Goose on Jan 14, 2008 5:51 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

the fact
that mclaren never uses him makes me not really care if he is in the trade because hes still not gonna use him

by rturk89 on Jan 14, 2008 5:56 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

Manager usage isn't a good excuse
for including or not including him in the trade.

But regardless, he is the most expandable part of the package, I will agree.

These pretzels....are making me thirsty!

by Goose on Jan 14, 2008 5:58 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

Just found out why the o's want sherrill
over at dov an o's insider said they want sherril because they intend to then flip him or jamie walker to the braves for Brent Lillibridge. Now it makes sense why they want sherrill.

by Graham on Jan 15, 2008 1:19 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

Good lefty relievers
are worth a lot in July. I'm sure they want him just to flip him for more prospects.

by PetRock on Jan 14, 2008 9:32 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

just found out why o's want sherrill
over at dov an o's insider said they want sherril because they intend to then flip him or jamie walker to the braves for Brent Lillibridge. Now it makes sense why they want sherrill.

by rturk89 on Jan 14, 2008 11:56 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

I read this.
It was in a comment by some random commenter who said "the O's Insiders are saying..." Meaning - The Orioles blogs, not insiders. Unless I'm an insider.

Oh my god... I'm an insider. The insiders are saying  Mike Morse + Vidro for Bedard!

Jose Vidro (DH - Ms) was arrested today in an Idaho Bathroom for having a wide stance and sucking.

by Librocrat on Jan 15, 2008 12:25 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

it makes sense though
as to why they would demand sherrill

by rturk89 on Jan 15, 2008 12:35 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

just found out why o's want sherrill
over at dov an o's insider said they want sherril because they intend to then flip him or jamie walker to the braves for Brent Lillibridge. Now it makes sense why they want sherrill.

by Graham on Jan 15, 2008 1:20 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

A lot of things make sense.
Doesn't make them true.
Jose Vidro (DH - Ms) was arrested today in an Idaho Bathroom for having a wide stance and sucking.

by Librocrat on Jan 15, 2008 8:45 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

just found out why o's want sherrill
over at dov an o's insider said they want sherril because they intend to then flip him or jamie walker to the braves for Brent Lillibridge. Now it makes sense why they want sherrill.

by Graham on Jan 15, 2008 1:20 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

An ace
To me, an ace isn't just the guy who pitches on the first fifth day.  An ace is your so-called stopper, the guy everyone expects to win or the other teams expect to lose to.  Look at RJ and what kind of an impact he had on our club for years....look at Moyer, or even Freddy.  Having a young kid like Felix who, in my estimation, should be ready to mature any day and become that next unstoppable, unhittable ace, and package him with a second guy who we can rely on to win 80% of his starts, relieves most of the pressure off of Felix.

 Imagine where he was last year when Ho and Reefer Jaw would come off of two TERRIBLE outings where we overused our bullpen to attempt to save the day.  Felix gets to his start and suddenly,he has a ton of pressure to win because no one else has and if he doesn't, who will.  Then, he HAS to go at least 7 or 8 innings (or maybe until his arm falls off) because there is no bullpen behind him.

Imagine 2008, a guy like Bedard comes in and suddenly becomes the ace.  He gets the matchup with the other team's unstoppable force.  Felix slides into the #2 spot and gets matched up with another team's #2.  Granted nowadays, most teams have a spectacular 1-2 punch, and we would now be on an even playing field with them.  We play Boston in a 3 game series and now instead of it being Felix-Silva-Batista vs. Beckett-Schilling-Matsuzaka its now Bedard-Felix-Silva vs. Beckett, Schiling and Dice-K.  I like those odds MUCH better.

To me adding a pitcher like Bedard would make Felix become that much better.  I just wish we wouldn't have to mortgage the farm for him.

by tkballer22 on Jan 14, 2008 6:26 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

i cant imagine
us losing 8 games in a row 4 times with bedard and felix

by rturk89 on Jan 14, 2008 6:31 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

just found out why o's want sherrill
over at dov an o's insider said they want sherril because they intend to then flip him or jamie walker to the braves for Brent Lillibridge. Now it makes sense why they want sherrill.

by Graham on Jan 15, 2008 1:21 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

I hate intangibles.
I caution to even write this, because its opening the door to irrational, intangible benefit-based arguments about player value that cannot be measured in any way whatsoever.

That being said, the only thing I feel good about for this trade is the fact that Bedard might be so good, that he might be able to pull the Mariners out of their typical 2-3 times a season tailspins where they can't win despite themselves.

I am fully aware of how useless it is to think of Winning and particular Pitchers, that good pitching is basically worthless without good defense and hitting and everything else we read every day on USSM and LL.  Oh yeah, and how stupid the FO is by thinking slumps are prevented by a Veteran Mentality and Chemistry.

I do believe there is a human factor to the game that is impossible to ignore, and I think it's a benefit to the other sides of the equation (defense, and especially offense) to have someone that can just go out and pitch better than almost anyone else.

Now, do I believe that Jones is worth it? No, I'd rather have 6 years of a good, young, athletic corner OF that  might develop into a good OPS guy.  But if it does happen, I am looking forward to watching a guy that can just pitch-- better than anyone else in a Mariners' uniform since Randy Johnson (I might be wrong on that one, but I am too tired to jog my memory).

by batura on Jan 14, 2008 5:47 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

Your last paragraph sums it up for me
I don't want this to happen, but since it feels like it probably will, at least we get to watch Erik Bedard.

by Jeff on Jan 14, 2008 9:00 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

Mariners
Well, the Mariners pretty much forget about every possible player strategy known to man-- especially the one where you have a really shitty 5th man in the rotation that you skip when there is an off day.

by batura on Jan 15, 2008 12:08 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

/DOV
You're forgetting that Bedard is the new Greg Maddux. You're also forgetting that the Mariners once had a hyped OF prospect named Jose Cruz Jr., and he ultimately failed to live up to his hype, so Jones will too. And that Greg Sherrill is easily replaceable. We should package Jones and Sherrill with Triunfel (worthless) and Tillman (he'll never make it), but not Morrow (the next Nolan Ryan), and win the 2008 pennant!

/end_Dov

by Katal LM on Jan 14, 2008 5:19 PM PST   0 recs

You are forgetting:
Oh and Dave Cameron is a poopyhead.

/end_Dov

These pretzels....are making me thirsty!

by Goose on Jan 14, 2008 5:35 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

I... I'm torn
I know its a terrible idea to send Jones away, but the thought of Washburn being the 5th best starter in our rotation makes me drool.

The loss of Sherrill I think is negligible, as EOF and RRS can pick up the slack pretty well. Also, that rotation should considerably lighten the load on the bullpen, so it may actually become better than last year's, especially come August.

Thinking about it more, I realize I can convince myself that both are pretty attractive options. Its like this. You throw a party, and you get wasted very early (this always happens to me when I host). You know that later that night your smoking hot coworker you've been flirting with is gonna show. But that's later and this is now. And now your roommates older sister (who is meh) is all over your jock and talking dirty. Of course, it is preferable to keep your eyes on the prize and wait. However, if the choice were taken our of your hands and given to a nice but misguided bald man with an elongated cranium, and you suddenly find that you're already in bed with the sister, you're not giong to be pretty happy just the same. there's a georgian saying - you can't argue with a naked woman.

by Mere Tantalisers on Jan 14, 2008 6:08 PM PST   0 recs

Oh my...
Is there an award for "Best Parable?"

If there is, you just won it.

by Wilder83 on Jan 14, 2008 6:15 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

Couldnt said it better myself
Even if I owned Lookout Landing.

Well done, sir. Have yourself a beer.

by Slica on Jan 14, 2008 6:19 PM PST   0 recs

FWIW, I went through the steps
Now subtract from that total of 30-40 however many runs you think we lose going from Sherrill to somebody else. Then subtract however many runs you think we lose going from Jones to another RF at the plate (if any). Finally, subtract however many runs you think we lose going from Jones to another RF in the field. What number are you left with?

40 - 20 (weighted runs compared to J. Affeldt) - 10 (BAT: Jones to Wlad) - 12.5 (GLOVE: Jones to Wlad)

=

-2.5 runs

by Matthew on Jan 14, 2008 6:43 PM PST   0 recs

BTW, this surprised me
I figured it would be a low improvement (see my first comment), but I had no idea the dropoff from Sherrill would be so heavy. And Affeldt wasn't even bad last year!

by Matthew on Jan 14, 2008 6:50 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

And naturally, I screwed it up trying to do
a quick calc. Relied on the wrong stat for pitching. Going by straight runs allowed and applying leverage, the drop off from Sherrill to Affeldt would be 12 runs, not 20.

So +5.5 runs total

by Matthew on Jan 14, 2008 6:55 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

Is that using 2007 leverage
or projected 2008 leverage?

by Jeff on Jan 14, 2008 8:59 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

I used Sherrill's career LI
since I figured that was the best way to project '08 in 10 seconds or less. It's been fairly stable.

by Matthew on Jan 14, 2008 11:38 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

I think you're overvaluing Sherrill
That or my own reliever numbers are off.

by Graham on Jan 15, 2008 12:47 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

Or undervaluing guys like O'Flaherty
Bill James projections look pretty nice for him.   Even xFIP wise, which kind of surprises me.

by marc w on Jan 15, 2008 9:21 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

Heh. Suck.
Jose Vidro (DH - Ms) was arrested today in an Idaho Bathroom for having a wide stance and sucking.

by Librocrat on Jan 14, 2008 6:52 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

does this take into account innings pitched?
Say RRS rounds out the rotation if we dont make the trade. He probably gives you 1-2 innings less per start than Bedard. So that means the bullpen pitches more, which means guys at the back of the bullpen pitch more, which costs you runs.

I'm thinking this is probably factored into your calculations, but I wasn't sure.

by Zack on Jan 14, 2008 10:18 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

Thank you John Hickey.
http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/baseball/archives/129461.asp
I will not make jokes in my sig. I will not make jokes in my sig. I will not...

by TIF on Jan 14, 2008 8:35 PM PST   0 recs

Erik Bedard
I've been stuck on inevitable for quite some time now.

I'm leaning towards "Go get Bedard" but not for reasons most people suggest.

In fact, my reason for getting him is kinda stupid.  Some people want him to provide that "1,2 punch" with him and Felix.  Some people want him because the guys that are being traded "are just prospects".

Why do I want him?  Because it would be considered a success for this low-grade front office.  Let's face it, as long as we have the front office that we have, we're not going to see the Mariners become an Indians, Athletics, Tigers, Red Sox, or even Yankees type team anytime soon.  These folks have a love for veterans and track-records even if said veterans may not be very good.

I stared off the offseason not wanting to get Bedard/Santana.  What changed my mind?  The direction this team was obviously heading in.  They think they can win.  Despite the availability of stopgap options on the market we decided to blow $48 million on Carlos Silva for four years.  We can be happen to retain Adam Jones but then we're also stuck with Carlos Silva and our backend being HoRam or Brandon Morrow.  NOT that putting up with that nonsense while keeping Adam Jones is a bad thing mind you.

I would be lying if I said I wouldn't be excited if we landed Bedard.  We're going to give up a lot and it's going to hurt.  People who don't think this are kidding themselves.  Also, by accepting this route, I believe we have two chances to win big...2008 and 2009.  After that, though, comes the consequence.  Oakland gets better, Texas gets stronger, and we start collapsing under the weight of the deals we'll have in place at the time.  Next thing we know, we're back in last place again with no Adam Jones and whomever else we give up.

Is that going to be worth the risk?  Depends.  Right now, I'm under the impression that based on the FO's line of thinking we're going to be heading back down the crapper eventually anyhow.  That makes it kind of easier to deal with.  Then again, watching Astrubal Cabrera contribute to the post season while Eduardo Perez does commentary on Baseball Tonight kinda stung.  Can I really stomach seeing Adam Jones tear it up in another uniform?  Or worse, watch him take Mariner pitching to the cleaners like Vlad does?

Basically, I want to get Erik Bedard because our FO is stupid.  They're at least going after something valuable this time.  Honestly, I'd pick a well-built team over this any day of the week.  Man, I wish we had a smart FO. :|

by ThundaPC on Jan 14, 2008 9:13 PM PST   0 recs

Hey, I'm all for Bedard
as long as it doesn't cost us Jones or Tuinfel.

Buy yeah, at least they aren't targeting a guy like Pavano '04.

"Goddamn Romans. Sure know how to make a ... drum room." --Matt Cameron

by JI on Jan 14, 2008 9:26 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

Jones - Bedard
Bedard is an underappreciated pitcher. This would be a great move for the M's.

Jones will probably be a great player, but Bedard will help the Mariners more right now AND in the next couple of years, I think.

If there's a trigger, the front office should pull it now.

ScoutingBook: Top Baseball Prospects, Closers and more.

by scoutingbook on Jan 14, 2008 9:26 PM PST   0 recs

The front office has pulled enough triggers
and in so doing made me want to pull one of my own.

by Jeff on Jan 14, 2008 9:26 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

Is this another sock puppet?
Next, tell us all about how pitching and defense wins championships!

Seriously, have you read any of the diaries?

Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.

by pdb on Jan 14, 2008 9:27 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

Geez
I have to stop reading comments from the Times (Baker's argument) and PI (Jones is back in the lineup thread).

Im baffled at how clueless people are.

I could be ok letting Jones go for Bedard if he were guaranteed to stay. I see the argument 'how often do the Ms get a frontline pitcher like this'?. They conveniently forget Bedard is virtually a lock to leave in two years...how often do we retain frontline pitchers?.

Bedard is an awesome pitcher. Im still not putting him as high (Santana/Peavy high) as everyone else until he has another awesome year. Just me being stingy.

But even the great Bedard will see double after double next year wiith our outfield defense. It felt like we gave up 3-5 doubles a game.

by Slica on Jan 14, 2008 9:26 PM PST   0 recs

you know, im actually excited about this trade
not because we're giving up adam jones (who i genuinely believe is going to be a special player - hell his floor is probably mike cameron, and mike cameron was/is a hell of a player).

of course i think the rumored packages are terrible. obviously, you cant know for sure what youve got with prospects, especially one as young as triunfel, but as we've said so many times on this board, you have at least have a decent educated guess always.

back to the subject of my comment, if erik bedard ends up in a mariner uniform, regardless of the cost, i will be damn excited to watch him on the hill for us. it goes against all rhyme or reason, but damn do i want to watch a guy like erik bedard pitch for the Ms

by seattlebruin on Jan 14, 2008 9:35 PM PST   0 recs

also,
it seems logical that having bedard and silva would put less stress on the bullpen then last year, and help avoid last years meltdown. perhaps we can find a few more runs saved there as well.

by seattlebruin on Jan 14, 2008 9:54 PM PST   0 recs

nobody wants to hear this arguement
because it goes against their credo of "save the youngsters!"

In reality, Bedard in the starting rotation will bump this team upto major contender status, and the Angels will have something real to deal with.

If/when the M's get into the playoffs, they will be a tough team to beat with Bedard/Felix 1-2 punch.

The trade now sounds like Morrow or Tillman, Jones, and GS52.

I would absolutely pull the trigger on this, especially if we can sign Bedard to more years.

This board (yes I'm calling it a board, so eat me) will just have to deal with the poor prospects of watching Bedard and Felix pitch back to back ohhh the horror! MORONS

We WANT Silva, damn it!

by I Heart Silva on Jan 15, 2008 7:39 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

I too would enjoy such a scenario
The pup that laughs when you're down on your luck.

by Scrappy the Scapegoat on Jan 15, 2008 7:46 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

I'm immensely curious...
How the fuck do you type without a functioning brain?

by Graham on Jan 15, 2008 7:50 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

Just found out why o's want sherrill
over at dov an o's insider said they want sherril because they intend to then flip him or jamie walker to the braves for Brent Lillibridge. Now it makes sense why they want sherrill.
We WANT Silva, damn it!

by I Heart Silva on Jan 15, 2008 7:53 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

Quaint
Question still stands.

by Graham on Jan 15, 2008 7:55 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

Nope
I Heart Silva wins this one.

by johnbai on Jan 15, 2008 9:29 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

Hush, you
Or we'll no longer be best friends.

by Graham on Jan 15, 2008 9:33 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

Oh Graham
Please know that "I Heart Silva" can never replace you in my life. I just have to give props when people earn them.

by johnbai on Jan 15, 2008 10:13 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

Fine, fine
I'd miss you too much if we weren't BFF anyway.

by Graham on Jan 15, 2008 10:13 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

I think you mean
"Hi, it's Larvae!"
Ill Ligitamus Non Carberendum

by PositivePaul on Jan 15, 2008 10:23 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

Do you honestly think
that adding Bedard and making no other moves will allow the M's to be a "major contender"?  Adding one stud pitcher will do nothing to put the M's on a level playing field with NYY/BOS/CLE - it just adds a great pitcher to a mediocre team.  
Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.

by pdb on Jan 15, 2008 7:59 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

Don't bother, pdb
Just abuse him for a little while and wait for the banhammer of mightiness to strike him down.

by Graham on Jan 15, 2008 8:01 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

Your arguement lack merit
They always have Graham Cracker.
We WANT Silva, damn it!

by I Heart Silva on Jan 15, 2008 8:03 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

I'm glad that
My arguments[sic] have Graham Crackers[sic]. God knows I wouldn't want them to go hungry.

I'll still take any of my arguments[sic] over your (however amusing) spasms of retardity.

by Graham on Jan 15, 2008 8:08 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

I'm going to start a punk band
and call it Spasms of Retardity.
Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.

by pdb on Jan 15, 2008 8:10 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

I prefer honey to vinegar
until the honey stops working, that is - then the vinegar gets poured straight into the eyeballs.  metaphorically speaking, of course.

I can't remember - why does it make sense for the O's to ask for Sherrill again?

Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.

by pdb on Jan 15, 2008 8:06 AM PST to parent up   0 recs