Thursday, November 29, 2007


Okay, well, I take it back. Trade for Santana. According to this story, apparently it might happen for Coco, Lester, Lowrie, and a 4th player who may or may not be Bowden. Holy hell, get that done! I mean, essentially the Sox would be exchanging a cheap young lefty (who in all likelihood has some growing pains left before he is reliable) for the best Lefty on the planet, albeit compensated appropriately. To do this, they would give up a center-fielder who we probably were going to move anyway, a stud-prospect who is probably not defensively good enough to be a SS and is blocked for at least a few years by Lugo/Pedroia/Lowell, and then a good AA prospect whose projected ceiling is probably a 2rd starter.

So, again, on paper, we are turning a young lefty into the best lefty on the planet for:
Our backup CF
A prospect with no place on the big club
A pitching prospect (always dicey) who might be a solid starter (or somebody else)

Wow. If the Sox can get this deal, without giving up Buccholz or Ellsbury (or Masterson), do it. Then, give Santana 6 years at $140. Not quite the level he was hoping for dollars-wise, but I'll bet you he would take it (or at least be hard-pressed not to).

Okay, now with all that said, there has got to be no way this report is accurate (or will get it done). Particulary since Delmon Young is probably their new CF, I'm not sure why Coco would have extra value for them (and that deal included a SS, too; though again, Lowrie is probably 2B or 3B). That this deal makes so much sense to the Red Sox means that the Twins probably know that and that they will have to ask for more. I think this is a Sox leaked story to drive up the price on the Yanks. This deal, albeit still costly, makes too much sense for the Sox. If there is any traction to this, do it. But color me skeptical (yet still ridiculously excited!).

Tuesday, November 27, 2007

Catching up

The Pats are incredible, and that game against the Eagles didn't worry me as much as I think it did some people. While I was pretty nervous during the whole ordeal, I take hope from the following:

On offense, the Pats actually did really well. Take away a questionable-at-best offensive pass intereference or the missed/not-missed field goal (the replay showed it seems to have been good), and the Pats punted twice. Their possessions were TD, TD, FG, TD, Punt, TD/FG/Missed FG debacle, 10 play drive that ended on downs at the 30, TD, Clock-kill for a punt. So, on 8 "non-clock kill" drives, they were a bad call away from 5 TDs and a FG. I'll take it. It seemed like less of a success for the offense because the Pats lost two possessions (Samuels TD-return and the onside kick Philly recovered).

On defense, they accomplished the game plan they wrote up. I was going crazy with all those in-cut passes getting completed, and I couldn't figure out why either a linebacker or Rodney Harrison wasn't dropping into coverage to at least clog up some of those passing lanes that were ridiculously open for most of the game. Watching a few replays, I started to realize that Harrison/Thomas/Colvin were staying about 4 yards behind the line of scrimmage on a lot of pass plays instead of dropping into that zone area that was open: they were spying Westbrook. I'm pretty sure the gameplan was: take away Westbrook and see if injured McNabb/AJ "backup" Feeley/Rookie could beat them. To AJ's credit, he almost did by exploiting the void in the defense that the extra defender applied to Westbrook created. This was a flaw in the game plan, not necessarily of the defense, and hopefully one that doesn't need to be repeated.

Special teams, eh, wished they'd been ready for the onside, but at the same time I would be thrilled if all our opponents always try to onside regularly: we'll recover a lot of them with better field position than on regular kickoffs.

Shifting gears:

Red Sox & baseball: The team is pretty much complete, at this point. Trade Coco (or maybe Ellsbury, whose value is probably a hell of a lot higher than the player he is destined to become for us) for some future prospect or a good reliever, resign Kielty, maybe see if you can get something valuable for Tavarez. Otherwise, you know what you have to go to war with, you have some good prospect in the rear to step up or be traded for replacements midseason, and kick some ass once the calendar turns April.

Also, avoid Santana, because you need to sign him to a free agent contract while giving up blockbuster prospect. Honestly, I'd roll the dice that he doesn't get moved and take a chance on signing him next year rather than lose 3 quality prospect (or, in all likelihood, 1 realized quality major leaguer) to pay him $20mm per. If the Yanks do trade for him, you just need to say, "oh well" and take solace in the fact that they are in weaker position to make deals or have cheap talent elsewhere and hope that Santana's spike in HRs is a trend and not a 1-year fluke. Great pitcher, but the cost to the franchise to get him may be slightly greater.