Herc

i just called omar pretending to be kevin towers and offered josh bard and scott hairston for carlos gomez. he said yes

even if they were getting rebuffed by the a's, orioles and twins regarding their aces, this is still a trade that could've been made a month or two from now. why not wait out what happens with santana/bedard/haren and see if they change their minds regarding what the mets have to offer? but yeah the trade sucks ballzack

i dont know, hamstrings are a pretty common athletic injury. what do you mean when you say the change in coaching attitude is the reason we have less injuries?

but what can you honestly do to prevent injuries? every team experiences them. the colts had very few injuries last season and now they are littered with them. the pats went through the same thing a few years back, and this season we are actually doing a bit better in this department than last year. so let's say for arguments sake that you are 100% correct and that our biggest problem is injuries. if they can't be prevented, what's the solution? that's the only way we should be thinking IMO, cuz just stating the problem does the team no good

wow that's a pretty bold statement, but in the end who knows if joba will handle the transition from bullpen back to the rotation. i was beginning to have doubts about how great hughes would be until the playoffs, even so i want to see how he handles adding the changeup to his arsenal before i get too high on him again. i had no idea they were planning on starting melky in CF this season. even so, he is somewhat expendable since you have a capable backup in damon. yeah he's a downgrade but i'd give up some d in the OF for a guy like santana. as for the long-term agreement, sure no one wnats to give a six year extension to a guy who is going to be 29, but santana is a smart pitcher who will adjust to the decrease in heat on his fastball. the guy is already relying heavily on his changeup as it is so I can see him making a pedro-like adjustment to getting old. in general NO ONE wants to give ANY pitcher a six or even a five year deal. pitchers are a risky long-term investment but because there are so many shitty pitchers out there and so few good ones you have to pay a premium if you want to trade or sign one--that's just how the market is being dictated the past 10 years or so, otherwise no team would do it

i think melky is definitely a starting OF on most teams (i'd take him in a millisecond to replace cameron on cf), but because right now he's the 4th OF and the yanks don't have to rely on him as much as their other tradable assets i think he's somewhat expendable

melky will be on the bench opening day. damon will start in cf and matsui will start in LF. that's not to say melky won't get plenty of playing time this season but the fact that he isn't a starter and isn't being counted on in the everyday lineup makes him expendable IMO

haha i dont think you meant 'terrific' isiah will get fired when someone who dolan presumably respects (his father, maybe stern?) puts pressure on him to do it. the guy is obsessed with being right and will stubbornly keep isiah to prove it. he did the same thing with glen sather. also, as bad as that score is, it's against one of the top 2 or 3 teams in the game, dolan will be more than happy to accept that as an excuse. as for the lawsuit, it wouldn't be right to fire isiah based on that until the appeal. i stand by my original opinion that she definitely has a case for wrongful termination, but an extremely weak case for sexual harrassment. i expect that the appeal--which will not garner as much media coverage and will therefore be a more fair hearing--will reverse the original decision in part (the sexual harrassment damages) and affirm the wrongful termination claim. i would imagine Dolan's lawyers feel the exact same way, otherwise they never would've let this case see a courtroom. the truth is this lawsuit means shit. do any of us view the knicks basketball team any differently because of the lawsuit? sure the media does, cuz it's a story, but what knick fan (unless they are looking for more reasons to pile on isiah) is really allowing this verdict to affect their thoughts on this franchise one way or the other?

injuries have hurt us, but if they have become a continuing trend with this team (which i believe they have) then it's up to the team to plan for them and shape its roster accordingly.

he was decent (at best) for us too, he's never really played like a 1st round cb though, and IMO peterson was better than him when healthy

because boston was the best team in baseball from start to finish and won a world series with their current roster--which they've just finished up keeping intact--you can very well make the argument that boston doesn't need santana nearly as much as the yankees do. im not saying you guys are wrong, but here's my opinion: what are the odds that all three of these prospects turn out to be hits? it's one thing to count on one of your highly touted pitching prospects to be your fourth or fifth starter, but 3 of them to be your 2nd, 3rd and 4th? that's a ton of risk if you ask me. it's not out of the question that by june of next season wang is doing his thing, joba is pitching very well (let's say 3.50 era), hughes is hurt, and kennedy simply isn't living up to expectations. now mike mussina (assuming pettitte retires) is your third starter and and you're back in the same situation as last season when you had to overpay to get clemens (this time it'll be pettitte, perhaps) to come out of retirement. as solid as melky is he's already surpassed where he was projected to be when he was a prospect and he isn't even being counted on to start next season. how much better can he get? and how many games can he realistically play as a 4th OF? if he duplicates his stats and games played from last season i'd say that doesn't make him anymore valuable than any starting position player except maybe damon--and obviously less valuable than all 5 starters + mo. hughes is nice and i think he'll be great, but as far as him being just as good as santana someday? highly unlikely. we're talking about the best pitcher in baseball at age 28 with only 4 years of mileage as a starting pitcher who has pitched well in the playoffs and has excelled in the american league. when you throw in the fact that there are no similar options in the free agent market (a joke), or the trade market (orioles won't trade bedard to the yanks, and peavy isn't on the trade block.....yet). there is more of a financial risk in santana and more of a performance risk in hughes. when you have the resources the yanks have you trade the performance risk for the financial risk and at the same time minimize the rotation risk. if joba pitches well and kennedy bombs then so what? you got santana, wang, joba and mussina and you fill in the 5th starter with a callup or a cheap alternative without putting yourself in the position to throw 20 million at pettitte to get him out of retirement. and if pettitte comes back at the beginning of the season then you are only taking a risk with joba this season as hughes will be gone and then whoever starts the season at the 5th spot (mussina or kennedy) you have a backup for him without making any transactions. anyway that's my two cents, i'd make this trade in a second. if im a yankee fan i love the potential and the promise of having these three guys in the rotation, but i hate the risk. i'd much rather have one or maybe two of them being counted on to hold their own as the 3rd/4th and 4th/5th spots then 3 of them to hold down the 2nd/3rd, 3rd/4th, and 4th/5th spots.

Hughes and Cabrera for Santana. During 72 hour negotiating window the yanks give santana a 6 year 150 million dollar extension. Santana is locked up for a total of 7 years, 163 million. no teams are shelling out dough to pay anyone's salary.

it's showing the yankees that a) they need santana more now that garza is gone and b) they no longer NEED a cf (melky) in any deal for santana. it's seriously a good strategy because it provides more balance on their team and gives them more leverage with the yanks

i mean i dont even watch college football, but just from reading, looking at past rookie linebackers, etc i knew patrick willis was more of a sure thing than revis, hall, ross, etc. if you're going to take a risk on a cb i'd rather it be a big financial risk on a proven cb than pay half that amont to a first round cb who you have no idea what you are getting.

and i honestly think our playbook sucks. it took coughlin 3 years and a big injury to burress to finally get shockey involved as a primary weapon in our offense. shotgun draw or screen to ward on 3rd and long? how many times have we seen that crap? there was a lot of times during the first few games where i would hold my breath during a play only to see burress make some sick catch and bail out the playcall. now that he's not doing this our playcalling has become way more exposed and i dont think that's a coincidence. truthfully, i hope we pull out of this and coughlin makes the necessary midseason adjustments--and i dont think firing the OC and replacing him with someone else on the staff will cut it. this season was the first since i've been a fan where i had absolutely no expectations coming into training camp, i never want to feel that way about this team again

cuz our franchise has always been cheap unless they are paying their own players--the only exception i can think of off the top of my head is kareem mckenzie and maybe kenny holmes if you consider his contract to be a big one. plax was considered a huge splash in the free agent market (for us) and he only got 24 mil or so right? i think we've taken the wrong approach when drafting defensive players. IMO drafting a 1st round linebacker carries way less risk than drafting a 1st round cb, so i'd rather draft lienbackers and shell out the big bucks for a proven cb. as happy as i've been with aaron ross a lot of it is the fact that he isn't a total bust and is showing flashes, but that doesn't mean he'll necessarily ever be more than a decent cb

i agree with echo, it'd be one thing if this was his first OC but it isn't. we're still bitching about the same things with both OC's: playcalling. coughlin is involved in the gameplanning and im sure he has some kind of final say on the plays that can be called. this is a big reason why i won't give up on eli becoming a great qb, i'd like to see how he performs in a different system with a new coach before i determine that he's a bust/average/etc

funny coincidence while we're on this subject: in my money league i was 1-2 and during all the shit talking i was lumped into a group of teams labeled 'bottom feeders' who were out of playoff contention, so i made a post guarenteeing i'd make the playoffs and i even cheesed it up by using fassel's 'pushing chips to the middle' quote. well i proceeded to win 7 in a row and clinched the playoffs with my 7th win. too bad im not going anywhere as long as jacobs and larry johnson remain injured :brooding:

coughlin wishes he were that slick

i seriously doubt it, every team overvalues their picks, randy moss went for a 4th rounder, the colts and seahawks couldn't get 2nd rounders for edge and alexander when they were in their primes.

it's not as bad as the day plow said "he came in my face"

punt down 31 with 11 minutes left? why not just bench everyone if you've given up....

i agree holiday should've won it, but i can't disagree more that coors field isn't still a ridiculous homefield advantage.

ahh sorry, i just re-read osi's post and realized he only said for 3 weeks or so. i usually see 'shut down' as 'put on IR'

rest him? sure. shut him down? what's the purpose of that?