Jump to content

alexei606

Limited Posting Member
  • Content Count

    325
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

14 Rookie +

About alexei606

  • Rank
    Plus Member since October 2008
  • Birthday 6/17/1967
  1. You continue to dazzle me with your wit. Want to try to really argue a point because you are really beginning to bore me with your non-arguments. I promise, my last post to you unless there is a real attempt on your part to argue points and opinions instead of trying to dismiss them.
  2. You are the god of keen observation - no one should ever doubt your wisdom or disagree with you, except of course TonyOh:rolleyes:
  3. Man, your powers of observation are just so mind boggling. You really can come up with some absolutely devastating arguments, I am just so in awe of your compelling and rational analysis of the state of baseball and particularly, the Orioles. You just have so much to offer, I just can't believe that your meaningful and well thought out posts are not being stated on the national scene. I bow to your greater wisdom and your knowledge of human nature.
  4. So Reimold is in a slump - you send him down because he's in a slump and is just now getting consistent playing time? Or, as VaTech stated "He is doing a good job working the count and getting a good pitch to hit, but he isn't hitting anything squarely, although VT's point was wrong which was "he is lost at the plate." Working the count, waiting for a good pitch to hit and going for that good pitch is not the definition of "being lost at the plate." Not hitting the ball squarely usually means timing/mechanical issues that usually can be worked out by more playing time and is one of the major
  5. That is exactly what prepared statements to the media do; "get detailed in the exact wording". My point is that Ripken has "not necessarily" refuted the comment attributed to Angelos about "not wanting credit given to him once the club returned to prominence". His attorneys could quite possibly come up with this wording in order to appear that he was refuting this comment attributed to Angelos. This is a tried and true diplomatic ploy and is not lying. I can't say definitely if this is the case, but it is quite plausible in my opinion.
  6. That is the beauty of the English language. You are correct that it could mean that (but not correct that it exactly means that), and that is why I will amend my post to say, "not neccesarily" and thus my contention that Ripken made a carefully worded prepared statement that looks like a refutation but is not one, is still quite plausible.
  7. Here is a scenario, Ripken carefully worded the statement and denied that it was said, which would make it technically true (thus diplomatic). In that scenario, Angelos may have used different words but the gist was the same. Notice that Ripken does not use "once the team returned to prominance", he used "success". Diplomacy is also about "saving face". Angelos needs what appears to be a refutation of "the inflammatory" portion of the article to "save face" - which is an age old diplomatic reality. Ripken (or his attorneys) understands this, thus he addresses this issue with the apparent
  8. Or may be Angelos was not going to hire Cal, and this "rumor" came out and Angelos was put in a box. Who knows? Whatever, I would love to see Cal back with the Orioles.
  9. Yes, I agree with this as well. But, Rowell does seem to be more into the games according to reports I have read, so I am hoping for the best, while waiting to see what he does for a prolonged period.
  10. He isn't playing RF. He is back to 3B and has played there some this year - in fact the last time he played there, it was reported that he made two really nice plays. I hope that he continues to improve and cut his K rate - that is still a big issue. Sure, he will strike out, but one in three or four ABs is way too high. If Rowell can cut that rate to an acceptable number for a power hitter and continue to hit for power, that would be a tremendous. I wouldn't rush him to Bowie unless he proves that he has nothing else to learn in the Carolina League - he needs to work on a lot of things a
  11. Not my definition of a "premium" FA - not even close. Texeira, and lesser extent, Holliday are "premium" FAs - who also IMO, the best of their class (hitters at least). Soriano turned his career year (still huge red flags on defense and plate discipline) into an ungodly bad contract for the Cubs. I don't think Tex for sure and Holliday will come close to this type of epic contractual failure. In fact, signing Holliday was essential for the Cards to sign Pujols - different situation than what any other team faced and the real reason why the Cards spent so much in years and dollars for him.
  12. Yep, I was one of those and actually started this idea last summer. I still believe that Jones is still a good trade chip and should be packaged with pitching to get that big bat or TOR. Agree with the rest of your post as well.
  13. Nice list. Vitek made BA's last draft tracker (trending up big time), so he might not be there at Round 3. Hague would be a great PU if he would sign for that. How about Garin Cecchini (he is out do to injury)? Or what about Devin Harris (I read recently he is moving up to 2nd-3rd round consideration) and of course Joe Leonard - he is moving up on your list to may be top 100 from your last post, he might still be available at Round 3. Any pitchers for Round 3 or beyond?
×
×
  • Create New...