Sunday Hot Stoving

  1. I want to reiterate on the front page that I’ve come off the fence and into the pro-J.D. Drew camp. At 4 years, $56 million with a fifth-year option, Drew comes at roughly the same price as Johnny Damon, but with better defense and more power. He also comes with injury concerns, but those that are of the greatest concern — the chronic kind — will be four years old on Opening Day. As a replacement for Trot Nixon (which is what he is), he is an excellent choice.
  2. The Boston Herald continues to push the Manny-to-Dodgers meme (the Globe has adopted the Padres as the suitor of choice), noting that the Sox will need to have Jonathan Broxton in any deal.  That would be the 6-foot-3, 290-pound 21-year-old who struck out 11.44 per 9 innings in 68 games last season. Such a deal could lead to a rash of cheesy baseball cards touting the "Three Johns" — Papelbon, Lester and Broxton.
  3. How boring is the offseason for the Yanks? Bronx Banter tried to get comments on the upcoming winter meetings, and it turned into a bitch-fest about the new Stadium. Peter Abraham posted about his trip to Orlando for the meetings, and all he could do was ask people what was on their iPods.
  4. The New York Post says the Yankees will entertain trade offers for Kyle Farnsworth at the meetings but gives us nothing concrete. It also says Cashman won’t sign Barry Zito for six years at $15 million per — which means Cashman won’t be signing Zito, and Omar Minaya probably will. Interesting final sentence from George King: "Their current rotation makes a lot of people nervous when it comes to competing with the Red Sox during the regular season, never mind the postseason."
  5. It doesn’t sell papaers, but the Daily News has the most realistic assessment of the Yanks’ off-season: "[I]s it possible that for the first time since signing Mike Mussina six years ago, this is the offseason the Yankees actually don’t add another superstar to their long list of marquee names? … [W]ith no significant need for a position player, and a mindset not to overpay for less-than-dominant starting pitching … this could be a quiet winter meetings."
49 comments… add one
  • of course, boring doesn’t necessarily mean bad. I guess the question is are we satisfied with the pitching staff as it is now (assuming Igawa is signed)? Do you go into the season with Wang and Mussina at the top of rotation, and the next three spots as big question marks to be filled by Pavano, Johnson, Humberto, Kartsens, Rassner and maybe even Hughes?

    Nick-YF December 3, 2006, 4:40 pm
  • Hmmm, I think the Yanks offseason has been pretty pound-for-pound with the Sox so far, in terms of excitement. Let’s see…bid an excessive amount to negotiate with an unknown quantity? Check. Trade a malcontent slugger for prospects? Check. Sign a player with a worrisome injury history? Check. In fact, the Yankees have actually completed the last two, with Sheff and Moose, where the Sox are still in the rumor phase, with Manny and Drew (the latter who I’m sure will flourish under the eye of Sauron that is the Sox fanbase/media).

    tom yf December 3, 2006, 4:41 pm
  • I don’t agree w/your assesment of Drew having more power than Damon. Johnny’s getting some old man strength as he nears his mid-thirties. Check out their lines in ’06:
    Damon – .482 SLG/24HR/35 2B
    Drew – .498 SLG/20HR/34 2B
    Call it a fluke of last season, but Damon had more homers, 1 more double, and was close in slugging to Drew.

    bloodyank78 December 3, 2006, 4:52 pm
  • Damon also had 100 extra at bats than Drew and didn’t have to play half of his games in the decidedly pitcher friendly Dodger Stadium.

    Vic SF December 3, 2006, 5:03 pm
  • The difference, BY, is that Damon overperformed his norms (24 HR when his previous high was 20), while Drew underperformed them. Even so, Drew beat Damon by 16 points of slugging, not an insignificant amount.
    Career slugging:
    Damon — .436
    Drew — .512

    Paul SF December 3, 2006, 5:08 pm
  • Drew definitely has much more power than Johnny Damon…remember that he has that short right-field porch over which to hit many homeruns. Plus Damon is a lot faster than Drew, so some of those singles become doubles due to Damon’s speed.
    That said, the Yankees offseason is only ‘boring’ because for once they’re not stupid enough to fall for the medicore pitchers masquerading as big names. Their offense needs nothing, every position is filled and then some (Melky Cabrera, a regular outfielder on many other teams, is sitting on the bench), their bullpen is one of the best in baseball, and their rotation as it stands is no worse than any team in their division (barring Matsuzaka and Igawa).
    The Yankees aren’t moving because they don’t need to move…everyone else needs to move to try and catch up to where the Yankees already are.

    Andrew December 3, 2006, 5:15 pm
  • I know what your point is, that’s why I made the fluke of last season comment. I’m curious to see if Johnny’s power upswing continues, I’m looking forward to those upper-deck shots to RF in Yankee Stadium this season.

    bloodyank78 December 3, 2006, 5:16 pm
  • “I know what your point is, that’s why I made the fluke of last season comment. I’m curious to see if Johnny’s power upswing continues, I’m looking forward to those upper-deck shots to RF in Yankee Stadium this season.”
    Personally, I’m more curious to see if his OBP stops its decline. Last season’s drop wasn’t really that bad, and the fact that his walk rate actually improved is kind of a good sign for him. But regardless…it’s worth keeping an eye on.

    desturbd1 December 3, 2006, 5:33 pm
  • Where the Yankees “are” is still a superb offensive team with a very spotty rotation, The Yankees are, in fact, where I hoped they would be at this point in the offseason, though I thought my hopes unrealistic. They are, to my eyes, no better than when they lost to the Tigers. They may even be worse off; everyone is older on the staff. Igawa notwithstanding, and also realizing there is a ton of time left until rosters are settled (I am under no delusions that the Yankees will field the exact team that exists today), ground has been made up by the Sox (still a ways to go!), not lost. It’s obviously a long race.

    SF December 3, 2006, 5:41 pm
  • Broxton is the Dodger’s closer of the future for the past season or so, and now with Gagne out, it’s his job to lose..
    The question is, would the Yanks be better off with Damon or Drew? For the Sox, getting a good #5 hitter is more important, but for the Yanks, they have too many of those, and for me, that’s why Damon is a better fit. I thought he was a bit on the expensive side (especially since I was hoping the Yanks would pick up Jones or Wells in the coming seasons) but at least in 2006 was better than what I expected.
    The Sox are generating news, but even though it has a higher volatility, well, tons of the things are still questionable.. that’s why they play the games! Is it good enough to make up for 13 games (give or take)? Especially now that the Wild Card is not a gimme..
    The Yanks have a great offense which averages out enough wins. What they still need to do (I project Igawa as a 5th starter, hopefully a reasonable one) are those big game winners that somehow elude them. Apparently Wang can’t pitch 3 games in the ALDS..

    Lar December 3, 2006, 5:51 pm
  • Yeah, and Damon played 80 or so of his games with a very, very short fence in RF. I know some will say the pole at Fenway, but we all know that to hit that homerun, it has to be perfect. Actually hiting it over the outfield wall in the Fens is a shot to say the least. Right field in the Bronx is comperable to that of Philly or my pee-wee field.
    There’s no need to compare the power between these two guys, Damon has it much, much easier than does Drew if he comes to Fenway.

    Brad December 3, 2006, 6:00 pm
  • On a completely unrelated note…here’s a story about Jon Lester. Hear about that Washington State QB who, after getting a concussion in a game, discovered a benign brain tumor? The two of them know each other.
    Nothing specific about Lester’s condition, but I still think it’s worth a read.

    desturbd1 December 3, 2006, 6:12 pm
  • …make fun of right field in yankee stadium all you want brad as long as you concede that the green monster makes pop-up hitters into doubles machines…fenway’s always been considered a hitter friendly park…as for the ease of hitting homers, bucky dent’s wasn’t exactly “a shot”…

    dc December 3, 2006, 6:37 pm
  • SF, I’m with you, the Yankees are exactly where I wanted them to be too: the best team in baseball, still. And when they lost to the Tigers? That was the best team in baseball losing to an inferior team in a short series. It happens.

    tom yf December 3, 2006, 9:59 pm
  • Also, how have the Sox made up any ground yet?

    Anonymous December 3, 2006, 10:01 pm
  • Although I defended Drews HR numbers earlier, vis a vis Damon… in fairness it should be pointed out that Damon hit 13 of his 24 homers AWAY from Yankee Stadium. (I still think it is an aberration)

    Vic SF December 3, 2006, 10:43 pm
  • You can’t compare Drew to Damon. In 11 seasons Damon has played 1704 games and in Drew’s 8 major league seasons he’s played 960.
    To compare the two is to admit that the Sox have wildly overpaid a player on sheer speculation.
    As a side note: Great news for Yankee fans–The Braves have signed Sturtz!

    walein December 3, 2006, 11:17 pm
  • DC –
    I’m not “making fun” of the short porch, but rather comparing players. If either of them could hit the green Monster, I obviously would have included that little nugget.
    But, since the fact remains that both of these players are hitting the ball to RF, where does the wall factor into anything?
    Or, did you just feel like introducing something that isn’t really relative to what we’re talking about?

    Brad December 4, 2006, 9:09 am
  • Drew has more power then Damon, he also strikes out more.
    Damon is a much better club house guy then Drew. This makes him more valuable then his numbers, which are still fantastic.
    Shouldn’t we be comparing Drew with Abreu, they even will cost about the same next season, and Damon with CoCo.

    Seth December 4, 2006, 9:54 am
  • Shouldn’t we be comparing Drew with Abreu, they even will cost about the same next season, and Damon with CoCo.
    Yes! Finally, someone comes to their senses.
    For Abreu, the Sox would have had to pay $15M (this year and next) + prospects. Drew, in this new hyper market is $14M (we think) + no prospects. And a slightly lesser player in my opinion, though the sabermetricians could probably find a way to disprove that. And they both come with the same less-than-stellar clubhouse reputations. (And we know how much that affected the Yankees, right?)
    Thanks, Seth, for straightening out the apples and oranges, seriously. The Damon/Drew comparisons are getting tiring.

    SF December 4, 2006, 10:00 am
  • Did LA not offer Drew arbitration? (that would cost the sox a pick)
    Abreu’s personality, etc was vouched for by Bowa. Who is backing Drew? Javy Lopez?

    Seth December 4, 2006, 10:18 am
  • Vouched for by Bowa, and dumped on by millions. Of course, it ended up working out, so clearly the fans were wrong on that one (so far), so why should we believe the situation is any different whatsoever with Drew? If the Red Sox were to believe every single negative thing written about Drew or any other player, they wouldn’t be so willing to consider the deal. Clearly they see something in him that the critical fans do not, right?
    All I’m saying is that it’s not right to judge him before he gets here. Maybe, he just hated LA to the point that he couldn’t take it. We’ve all been at jobs we did not like, and it showed in our lives and personality.
    Just like with Abreu, maybe it’s just time for him to change things up and play some meaningful baseball.

    Brad December 4, 2006, 10:30 am
  • JD Drew has played on four division winners in his career. I will not play a game of “cause and effect”, because every clubhouse probably has it’s surly members, it’s fragile member, it’s prima donna-ish members. Because those teams won divisions doesn’t mean that Drew is a great teammate. But it does show that even if Drew isn’t a great teammate, his personality is no hindrance to the success of a team as a whole.
    Drew was not offered arbitration.

    SF December 4, 2006, 10:32 am
  • To be more specific, the out clause in Drew’s contract prohibited the Dodgers from offering arbitration if Drew exercised it.
    In my defense, I brought up the Damon comparison because Damon was the key outfield free agent the Red Sox decided not to sign last offseason for similar money.
    Abreu is a very similar player, and Drew will cost the Sox less. Yet the same people who screamed at the Sox for not “doing what it took” to get Abreu at the deadline are now screaming that getting Drew is a bad idea. If that’s not faulty reasoning, I don’t know what is.

    Paul SF December 4, 2006, 10:43 am
  • not this guy.

    Brad December 4, 2006, 11:42 am
  • Not to focus too much on Drew’s injury history, but Bobby Abreu hasn’t played less than 151 games in a season since 1998. Drew’s never played that many. Abreu’s a horse. Drew just seems fragile. In terms of sheer offensive production, Abreu has over 1000 more total bases (200 more doubles!) in an extra season and a half. He’d driven in over 100 runs 5 of the last 6 seasons. Drew touched that number for the first time this year.
    If healthy though, they certainly are similar players: Abreu: .302/.412/.507; Drew: .286/.393/.512. And the point about giving up prospects is well taken, although in the end, the Yankess didn’t have to give up that much for him (before you say it, I know it has been reported the Phillies asked more from the Sox).
    As for clubhouse and fan concerns, there is a world of difference between being hated in St. Louis or L.A. (Drew) and being hated in Philadelphia (Abreu . . . and, well, Drew also).

    Amsterdam YF December 4, 2006, 1:46 pm
  • being hated in St. Louis or L.A
    What I would like to know is how this impacted the team’s ability to win divisions? And what about his tenure in Atlanta? Was Drew hated there too? Did that keep Atlanta from winning the division during his stint?
    I fully appreciate that Drew comes with something of a reputation. But I would like to know how, empirically, one can show this to have had negative impact on his team’s ability to succeed. One can’t. Chemistry is obviously valuable, but it also may be overrated. Jeter and A-Rod co-exist, though it’s clear there is friction. They still win divisions, right? Why are people so afraid of JD Drew, or so quick to jump on the Sox for this aspect of his game? And yes, I know we Sox fans jump on A-Rod for his personality foibles. But that’s because it’s fun with him. ;-) Can bagging on JD Drew’s personality really bring as much pleasure to YFs?
    If you think about it, Drew’s more of a winner than lots of other “great clubhouse guys”.

    SF December 4, 2006, 2:00 pm
  • Heh, for what it’s worth, Grady sends his approval.

    desturbd1 December 4, 2006, 2:28 pm
  • Good, because we know how much SFs trust Grady’s judgment ;-)
    SF – the part about Drew’s personality was more in response to someone earlier who mentioned Abreu’s supposed bad reputation before joining the Yankees. I was merely saying it’s easier to get a bad rep in Philly (or NY or Boston) than in St. Louis or LA. As for Atlanta, he was only there one year, and he hit .302/.436/.569 in 145 games. What’s not to like?
    To be clear, I don’t think Drew’s personality will have ANY negative effect on the Sox’s ability to win the division or make the playoffs. But I think his tendency to miss games could, which is something the Sox wouldn’t have to worry about with Abreu, which was the point of my initial post.

    Amsterdam YF December 4, 2006, 2:38 pm
  • I agree with you, A-YF. I was the one who posted about Abreu’s personality. It was said that he “dogged it” when unhappy. I didn’t buy it. It turns out that he didn’t dog anything in New York, which should tell you most of what you need to know about this issue.
    Drew, I would think, should be afforded some open-mindedness on this issue, even as there’s some room for reasonable skepticism about his attitude. I think this open-mindedness should be offered, especially considering he’s played for a series of winning teams.

    SF December 4, 2006, 2:48 pm
  • I think we all tend to be arguing around in circles on this. Those who support the Drew signing in all its glory view him as someone who hasn’t had a chronic (See: Knee problems from running, arm problems from throwing, etc.) injury since 2002. We don’t consider getting hit by a pitch and shattering a wrist something he had any control over, and we think 145-155 games of him in RF is worth the money.
    Everyone else rightfully points out that regardless of how it happens…Drew gets hurt. Fairly frequently. And there’s a legitimate case to me made for the “staying healthy is a skill” train of thought. I really think this is just two ways of looking at the same issue, and that there’s no way any of us can entirely prove our points.
    As for the personality issues, I’ll believe it when I see it. Philly fans only hate Drew because he (Boras) asked for more money and, when he (Boras) didn’t get it, refused to sign. (Hypocritical for SF’s or YF’s to criticize him, since this is the same bargaining tactic that often brings us our best picks. See: Craig Hansen, Danny Bard, and I think Phillip Hughes). As for STL…he got hurt a lot and didn’t live up to the hype, then Tony LaRussa (who cares about him anyway?) criticized him in his book. Am I missing anything there? And Dodgers fans hate him because…wait, what did he do? He broke a wrist, which probably exacerbated the DL Drew thing…anything else? I know Bill Plaschke (another hack creating a story. See: Dan Shaughnessey) hammered him the entire time he was there…but all Dodgers fans usually tell me is “he didn’t hustle, if you watch him you can tell he’s a passionless jerk.” And that’s pretty weak.
    Personality shouldn’t be dragged into this unless we’re talking about a jackass of Bondsian proportion…and we clearly aren’t. Besides, Boston seems to have handled Schilling pretty well, and spent years putting up with Pedro and Manny’s antics.

    desturbd1 December 4, 2006, 3:12 pm
  • The Drew issue for me has to do with Drew’s games played. I know players get hurt. Some still are better competitors than others. Maybe work ethic, toughness are better terms. Maybe it has to do for level of respect for the people they play with.
    Drew is a great player and a valuable signing, but he has a few knocks. I mean if numbers and winning divisons is what we should go by we should be acting fast to sign up Barry Bonds.

    Seth December 4, 2006, 3:42 pm
  • “Drew is a great player and a valuable signing, but he has a few knocks.”
    And I think from both sides that’s the defining sentence of the argument.

    Paul SF December 4, 2006, 3:57 pm
  • Why wouldn’t a team want J.D. Drew? He’s 31, he is no longer a prospect, he owns his skill set at this point. There isn’t going to be a sudden spike. BUT he is a .290’s hitter, averages 20+ HR’s and 90 RBI’s. He’s a plus OF, with a good arm. His OB% (413) is the same as Abreu over the past 3 seasons (Only Bonds and Berkman are higher over the past 3 seasons). He is a solid player when healthy, very similar to Paul O’Neill (except with injury issues – Yes I know it’s sacriligous). He isn’t the normal Yankees-Red Sox signing that would put fear into a team, like Schilling or A-Rod, but it’s a solid move. A move that is getting way to much play. As for the questions of personality, didn’t the 2004 team have a bunch of idiots and do just fine? Why are sox fans suddenly the authorities on who is a good teammate and who isn’t? It is what it is a solid, not spectacular signing….leave it alone.

    Triskaidekaphobia YF December 4, 2006, 4:15 pm
  • The Drew signing is an enormous gamble. the upside is very good and the downside is very costly. His hsitory has shown that “a few knocks” means he hasn’t been known to put together much consistent playing time–ever.

    walein December 4, 2006, 4:16 pm
  • Averages 390 AB’s per season…It’s only a huge gamble if the Sox trade Manny BECAUSE they know they can replace him with Drew. Otherwise, you added a solid OB guy and a good defender. I don’t understand the fuss, I honestly don’t.

    Triskaidekaphobia YF December 4, 2006, 4:22 pm
  • The Drew signing is probably a very reasonable gamble. And even though I think he’s a little bit on the injury prone side, he should contribute enough to make that money..
    Manny is scary as hell, and Hall of Famers doesn’t just get replaced that easily. Drew should be reasonable good enough.. now let’s see these “intangibles” ;)

    Lar December 4, 2006, 4:32 pm
  • I wonder, in theory, if the Red Sox would play Coco in right field, Willy Mo in center, and Drew in left field (assuming Manny is leaving). This would limit the amount of running Drew does, and with an already good arm, he could probably control that wall pretty well.
    I think this is the best chance of keeping him healthy. Right field in the Fens is a nightmare sometimes, so putting him in left would assure that he stays pretty immobile most of the time.

    Brad December 4, 2006, 5:01 pm
  • There’s a NESN video at Boston.com where Bob Ryan and Dan Shaughnessy weigh in on the JD Drew signing and, uh, holy cow!
    Ryan says Drew is a completely emotionless player who will not play well in Boston, and fears it will be a complete disaster. He even goes on to call Drew a slug! Yes, a slug. Ryan said look up the definition of slug in the dictionary and there will be a picture of Drew there. Yikes!
    Shaughnessy agrees with Ryan, but is a little less vehement. He brings up the mistake of letting Damon go and btw, said Damon is a much better ballplayer than Drew, as a guy who could perform under pressure in Boston. These are two of Boston’s best known sports writers saying this.
    Now I don’t know how Drew will perform in Boston if they do sign him. He’s certainly got some nice numbers when he’s healthy. But replacing a popular player like Trot, and with all the negativity already flying around out there before he even signs a contract, Drew will be under tremendous pressure and if he gets off to a slow start, gets hurt right away, or doesn’t bust his ass like Trot did, it could get bad in a hurry.

    whatever December 4, 2006, 5:51 pm
  • yeah, both guys were martyrs towards the front office a couple years ago when they let Pedro and Billy-Boy walk to, FWIW.
    I can’t even imagine what Drew will have to go through once that slump kicks in. Every naysayer in the book will be on the “told you so” bandwagon.
    It’s pretty bad to start off that way before you even swing a bat for a team. I hope he does well, and does nothing but slam both reporters the entire time. Both guys kill ManRam, killed Trot, and everyone else on the team, and now they want to get their punches in on this guy before he can even defend himself with his play? It’s out of control.
    It’s almost like the Boston Press kings have some kind of agenda against the Sox sometimes. I hope their little interview blows up in their faces – on way or another. Even if Drew doesn’t play in Boston, I hope he has an amazing year – one that he’s more than capable of putting up. I hope to see the resulting interview on how the Sox missed the boat with Abreu and Drew, and how they’re so stingy with money.
    I really, really hope he has success no matter where it is.

    Brad December 4, 2006, 6:00 pm
  • Best known does not neccessarily equal “credible” or “well-respected” in either case, most notably Shaughnessy.

    Quo December 4, 2006, 6:08 pm
  • Why are sox fans suddenly the authorities on who is a good teammate and who isn’t?
    I, for one, am not making any kind of claim. In fact, just the opposite: I have NO IDEA what kind of teammate he will be. But if he’s a bad one, I also suspect hope it will have little to no impact on the Sox’ playoff chances. See Bradley, Milton. Or Bonds, Barry. Weren’t the Giants like a one-inning pitching implosion from winning the World Series against the Angels with both Bonds AND Jeff Kent, two of the apparently worst teammates ever?
    As for Trot’s “busting his ass” every day, well, I loved Trot. But Trot’s problem was that his ass WAS busted almost every day.

    SF December 4, 2006, 6:12 pm
  • Brad – though totally unrelated, that was half the reservation I had for DM..
    And Drew is at least half-proven. It’s a bit outrageous though how early this is, but then maybe there’s just really not much to talk about. Down here everyone’s bitching about the Giants too much to notice..

    Lar December 4, 2006, 6:12 pm
  • Well-put Quo…funny that in this case, Shaughnessy’s the one leaving himself an out. He actually looks downright reasonable in that video; he acknowledges the concerns but says he doesn’t know Drew well enough to call him a slug. Meanwhile Ryan’s credibility sinks to a new low.
    There’s something unnerving about a professional journalist going on national television and speaking with such vitriol against a player before he even comes to town. Funny, that I don’t remember him criticizing Schilling, who actually appeared on SI’s list of most hated athletes as voted by their peers. Ryan’s going off of 2nd-hand accounts and other news stories, yet attacking Drew like he came home the other night to find the guy banging his wife. Really unprofessional, in my opinion.

    desturbd1 December 4, 2006, 6:29 pm
  • I found Ryan’s comments especially curious. If you don’t think a certain player would be a good fit for the Sox, OK fine. But Ryan’s comments sounded like he had a strong personal grudge against Drew.
    Maybe Ryan’s been in a bad mood lately. On ESPN’s The Sports Reporters yesterday, he was railing on Mike Lupica about whether Bronco’s coach Shanahan was starting Jay Cutler instead of Jake Plummer because Parcells in Dallas had had success replacing Bledsoe with Tony Romo. Lupica thought there was a connection, Ryan thought there wasn’t and he let Lupica know in no uncertain terms he thought he was completely full of it, much to my delight. I find Lupica such an irritation, he should be on Fox News.

    whatever December 4, 2006, 6:33 pm
  • “I found Ryan’s comments especially curious. If you don’t think a certain player would be a good fit for the Sox, OK fine. But Ryan’s comments sounded like he had a strong personal grudge against Drew.”
    Exactly. When your entire argument consists of, “This is a mistake, he’s lazy, he’s a slug, look up the definition of slug, he’s in there…” Not much substance. And like the troll-blogger who spends half his time calling anyone who disagrees with them names…it hurts Ryan’s future credibility. Or at least, it does with me.
    I will say this, though: He was right to tell of Lupica. It’s one thing to trash somebody for…existing…it’s another to tell someone off for saying something that asinine.

    desturbd1 December 4, 2006, 6:45 pm
  • How odd is it that the YFs are the rational ones about Drew, whereas SFs (not here) are going crazy. And really, I don’t know that it’s SFs as much as the columnists (Ryan, Shaughnessy and Callahan in particular). SOSH likes the signing quite a bit.
    It reminds me of the A-Rod silliness last season, when SFs were rational and YFs (again, not on this site) were ready to kill the guy.

    Paul SF December 4, 2006, 7:33 pm
  • I don’t know that it’s SFs as much as the columnists
    It’s always the columnists. That’s why they are columnists. Bob Ryan’s best days were in the heights of the Larry Bird era. Remember that this is the guy who suggested a beatdown of Jason Kidd’s wife.
    As much as I dislike some of the New York press blowhards (Pete Vecsey, Lupica, King, etc.) there are still more quality columnists here than in Boston (George Vecsey, Dave Anderson to name just two). With Boston I strain to name any truly classy sports columnists (beat writers, not as big a problem). Ron Borges? Shaughnessy? Masarotti? You’ve got to be kidding me. Ryan used to be great (or at least I remember him writing some great stuff back in the Bird-days), but no more.

    SF December 4, 2006, 8:07 pm
  • …brad, sorry about the stadium comparison, but it is relevant, since both stadiums have some quirks…that’s what makes them quaint baseball shrines…
    …as for drew, folks, to hell with the comparisons…judge the man on his own merits…the bottom line is that sf’s have to rationalize his acquistion…it’s like an arranged marriage…you need to find a way to love him, and make it work…under the circumstances, to be honest, i’d be doing the same thing as the sf’s on this one…but, having said that, i don’t think you’ll be sorry or have to make excuses for him…he’s talented, his injuries seem overblown, and in the hands of francona [who i think is underrated as a manager], he could very well be a solid citizen…
    …as for clubhouse prima donnas, we may find out this year just how good our captains are at dealing with that crap…

    dc December 4, 2006, 8:14 pm

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.