Surprise, surprise: "Everything Man" over Cedeno's

[Bruce Miles]

I'm reading this thread in the Phoenix airport.

 

Time to relax: Ronny Cedeno will be the opening-day shortstop and will be given every opportunity to keep the job. Period. How many reporters did you see making a big deal of this? This is one of Dusty's rambles that morphed from a discussion about a "platoon" at second base. While there is legit concern given Dusty's history, it's no time to panic. Ronny will get his chance. He's got to relax and just play, which is what I think he'll do.

 

Heading home and then on to Cincy Sunday.

Edited March 31, 2006 by Bruce Miles

[badger1679666666]

I'm reading this thread in the Phoenix airport.

 

Time to relax: Ronny Cedeno will be the opening-day shortstop and will be given every opportunity to keep the job. Period. How many reporters did you see making a big deal of this. This is one of Dusty's rambles that morphed from a discussion about a "platoon" at second base. While there is legit concern given Dusty's history, it's no time to panic. Ronny will get his chance. He's got to relax and just play, which is what I think he'll do.

 

Heading home and to Cincy Sunday.

 

You always play the role of valium on these type threads. It's quite welcome.

[RynoRules]

I'm reading this thread in the Phoenix airport.

 

Time to relax: Ronny Cedeno will be the opening-day shortstop and will be given every opportunity to keep the job. Period. How many reporters did you see making a big deal of this. This is one of Dusty's rambles that morphed from a discussion about a "platoon" at second base. While there is legit concern given Dusty's history, it's no time to panic. Ronny will get his chance. He's got to relax and just play, which is what I think he'll do.

 

Heading home and to Cincy Sunday.

 

Thanks for the piece of mind, Bruce.

[CubinNY]

I'm reading this thread in the Phoenix airport.

 

Time to relax: Ronny Cedeno will be the opening-day shortstop and will be given every opportunity to keep the job. Period. How many reporters did you see making a big deal of this. This is one of Dusty's rambles that morphed from a discussion about a "platoon" at second base. While there is legit concern given Dusty's history, it's no time to panic. Ronny will get his chance. He's got to relax and just play, which is what I think he'll do.

 

Heading home and to Cincy Sunday.

 

You are the man Bruce!

[Caryatid]

The bigger issue here, of course, is that if the numbers were completely reversed (Cedeno and Perez), Baker would be falling over himself in the media every day doing his best to say how much confidence he has in Neifi, how Neifi has "done it for years," and how he can't afford to just give people playing time based upon ST numbers.

 

The point is that young players, on this team, have to be so above-and-beyond better than the mediocre veteran they're competing with (see Sean Marshall) to even rate an eyebrow raise from Baker. And then, at the slightest bit of faltering, he undermines their position by planting quotes in the paper about how they need to step up.

 

The equation is simple: Perez guarantees you an OBP of .300 or less and a decent glove. Cedeno guarantees you nothing, but the potential for a higher ceiling is there. If, as many people have stated, the year "depends upon the pitching," then putting Cedeno out there costs the Cubs nothing, and has the potential for being a big plus. I don't see what the problem is.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What will be even more interesting is when Murton has a week where he hits .200 (as every player does)...what creaky veteran will see the HollyTime then?

[Bruce Miles]

The bigger issue here, of course, is that if the numbers were completely reversed (Cedeno and Perez), Baker would be falling over himself in the media every day doing his best to say how much confidence he has in Neifi, how Neifi has "done it for years," and how he can't afford to just give people playing time based upon ST numbers.

 

The point is that young players, on this team, have to be so above-and-beyond better than the mediocre veteran they're competing with (see Sean Marshall) to even rate an eyebrow raise from Baker. And then, at the slightest bit of faltering, he undermines their position by planting quotes in the paper about how they need to step up.

 

The equation is simple: Perez guarantees you an OBP of .300 or less and a decent glove. Cedeno guarantees you nothing, but the potential for a higher ceiling is there. If, as many people have stated, the year "depends upon the pitching," then putting Cedeno out there costs the Cubs nothing, and has the potential for being a big plus. I don't see what the problem is.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What will be even more interesting is when Murton has a week where he hits .200 (as every player does)...what creaky veteran will see the HollyTime then?

 

Whether it's right or wrong, it's like this on every team in baseball and in many industries: Young workers (or baseball players) have to prove themselves, and experienced hands get the benefit of the doubt. On top of it, the front office signed Neifi to a guaranteed two-year deal.

[Caryatid]

The bigger issue here, of course, is that if the numbers were completely reversed (Cedeno and Perez), Baker would be falling over himself in the media every day doing his best to say how much confidence he has in Neifi, how Neifi has "done it for years," and how he can't afford to just give people playing time based upon ST numbers.

 

The point is that young players, on this team, have to be so above-and-beyond better than the mediocre veteran they're competing with (see Sean Marshall) to even rate an eyebrow raise from Baker. And then, at the slightest bit of faltering, he undermines their position by planting quotes in the paper about how they need to step up.

 

The equation is simple: Perez guarantees you an OBP of .300 or less and a decent glove. Cedeno guarantees you nothing, but the potential for a higher ceiling is there. If, as many people have stated, the year "depends upon the pitching," then putting Cedeno out there costs the Cubs nothing, and has the potential for being a big plus. I don't see what the problem is.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What will be even more interesting is when Murton has a week where he hits .200 (as every player does)...what creaky veteran will see the HollyTime then?

 

Whether it's right or wrong, it's like this on every team in baseball and in many industries: Young workers (or baseball players) have to prove themselves, and experienced hands get the benefit of the doubt. On top of it, the front office signed Neifi to a guaranteed two-year deal.

 

 

You're right about every team in baseball. Except, of course, for the Oakland A's. Sure has hurt their chances this year.

[Rob]

I'm reading this thread in the Phoenix airport.

 

Time to relax: Ronny Cedeno will be the opening-day shortstop and will be given every opportunity to keep the job. Period. How many reporters did you see making a big deal of this? This is one of Dusty's rambles that morphed from a discussion about a "platoon" at second base. While there is legit concern given Dusty's history, it's no time to panic. Ronny will get his chance. He's got to relax and just play, which is what I think he'll do.

 

Heading home and then on to Cincy Sunday.

 

Be on the lookout while you're in that airport, I saw John Cleese in there when I left last week.

[Bruce Miles]

The bigger issue here, of course, is that if the numbers were completely reversed (Cedeno and Perez), Baker would be falling over himself in the media every day doing his best to say how much confidence he has in Neifi, how Neifi has "done it for years," and how he can't afford to just give people playing time based upon ST numbers.

 

The point is that young players, on this team, have to be so above-and-beyond better than the mediocre veteran they're competing with (see Sean Marshall) to even rate an eyebrow raise from Baker. And then, at the slightest bit of faltering, he undermines their position by planting quotes in the paper about how they need to step up.

 

The equation is simple: Perez guarantees you an OBP of .300 or less and a decent glove. Cedeno guarantees you nothing, but the potential for a higher ceiling is there. If, as many people have stated, the year "depends upon the pitching," then putting Cedeno out there costs the Cubs nothing, and has the potential for being a big plus. I don't see what the problem is.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What will be even more interesting is when Murton has a week where he hits .200 (as every player does)...what creaky veteran will see the HollyTime then?

 

Whether it's right or wrong, it's like this on every team in baseball and in many industries: Young workers (or baseball players) have to prove themselves, and experienced hands get the benefit of the doubt. On top of it, the front office signed Neifi to a guaranteed two-year deal.

 

 

You're right about every team in baseball. Except, of course, for the Oakland A's. Sure has hurt their chances this year.

 

The A's haven't played a game yet. We'll see what their chances are.

The Cubs will have two young players, almost rookies, in their starting lineup: Cedeno and Murton. They'll also start a rookie on ESPN Sunday night baseball: Sean Marshall. They also used more young players in spring training than I've seen in nine years of traveling with the team. Let's see how it plays out.

 

Oh, and I picked the A's to win their division.

[Caryatid]

The bigger issue here, of course, is that if the numbers were completely reversed (Cedeno and Perez), Baker would be falling over himself in the media every day doing his best to say how much confidence he has in Neifi, how Neifi has "done it for years," and how he can't afford to just give people playing time based upon ST numbers.

 

The point is that young players, on this team, have to be so above-and-beyond better than the mediocre veteran they're competing with (see Sean Marshall) to even rate an eyebrow raise from Baker. And then, at the slightest bit of faltering, he undermines their position by planting quotes in the paper about how they need to step up.

 

The equation is simple: Perez guarantees you an OBP of .300 or less and a decent glove. Cedeno guarantees you nothing, but the potential for a higher ceiling is there. If, as many people have stated, the year "depends upon the pitching," then putting Cedeno out there costs the Cubs nothing, and has the potential for being a big plus. I don't see what the problem is.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What will be even more interesting is when Murton has a week where he hits .200 (as every player does)...what creaky veteran will see the HollyTime then?

 

Whether it's right or wrong, it's like this on every team in baseball and in many industries: Young workers (or baseball players) have to prove themselves, and experienced hands get the benefit of the doubt. On top of it, the front office signed Neifi to a guaranteed two-year deal.

 

 

You're right about every team in baseball. Except, of course, for the Oakland A's. Sure has hurt their chances this year.

 

The A's haven't played a game yet. We'll see what their chances are.

The Cubs will have two young players, almost rookies, in their starting lineup: Cedeno and Murton. They'll also start a rookie on ESPN Sunday night baseball: Sean Marshall. They also used more young players in spring training than I've seen in nine years of traveling with the team. Let's see how it plays out.

 

Oh, and I picked the A's to win their division.

 

I don't want to be Mr. Moneyball (because I think it can be taken too far), but I just don't understand why baseball is attached to this line of thinking when a team like the A's has proven for nearly 10 years that shrewd use of young players and refusing to overpay for mediocre veterans is not only a successful long-term strategy, but also can work in the short-term (thus insuring the job security so many GMs cite as the reason they stick with mediocre veterans).

 

If I'm running a business and a competitor is doing as well as I am, but doing it more efficiently and with lower costs, I'm going to steal his idea. Why don't GMs get this? Is "traditional values" that powerful of a restraint?

[MeatampPotatoesMan]

The Braves have done it better than the A's and for longer. Two completely different methods of building the mouse trap. I don't know of any reason why they both can't work, but one thing is for sure, we don't have the organizational talent/philosophy that the Braves do (not referring to players, but that's true too).

 

We promote too fast and don't accurately assess young talent.

[Bruce Miles]

The bigger issue here, of course, is that if the numbers were completely reversed (Cedeno and Perez), Baker would be falling over himself in the media every day doing his best to say how much confidence he has in Neifi, how Neifi has "done it for years," and how he can't afford to just give people playing time based upon ST numbers.

 

The point is that young players, on this team, have to be so above-and-beyond better than the mediocre veteran they're competing with (see Sean Marshall) to even rate an eyebrow raise from Baker. And then, at the slightest bit of faltering, he undermines their position by planting quotes in the paper about how they need to step up.

 

The equation is simple: Perez guarantees you an OBP of .300 or less and a decent glove. Cedeno guarantees you nothing, but the potential for a higher ceiling is there. If, as many people have stated, the year "depends upon the pitching," then putting Cedeno out there costs the Cubs nothing, and has the potential for being a big plus. I don't see what the problem is.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What will be even more interesting is when Murton has a week where he hits .200 (as every player does)...what creaky veteran will see the HollyTime then?

 

Whether it's right or wrong, it's like this on every team in baseball and in many industries: Young workers (or baseball players) have to prove themselves, and experienced hands get the benefit of the doubt. On top of it, the front office signed Neifi to a guaranteed two-year deal.

 

 

You're right about every team in baseball. Except, of course, for the Oakland A's. Sure has hurt their chances this year.

 

The A's haven't played a game yet. We'll see what their chances are.

The Cubs will have two young players, almost rookies, in their starting lineup: Cedeno and Murton. They'll also start a rookie on ESPN Sunday night baseball: Sean Marshall. They also used more young players in spring training than I've seen in nine years of traveling with the team. Let's see how it plays out.

 

Oh, and I picked the A's to win their division.

 

I don't want to be Mr. Moneyball (because I think it can be taken too far), but I just don't understand why baseball is attached to this line of thinking when a team like the A's has proven for nearly 10 years that shrewd use of young players and refusing to overpay for mediocre veterans is not only a successful long-term strategy, but also can work in the short-term (thus insuring the job security so many GMs cite as the reason they stick with mediocre veterans).

 

If I'm running a business and a competitor is doing as well as I am, but doing it more efficiently and with lower costs, I'm going to steal his idea. Why don't GMs get this? Is "traditional values" that powerful of a restraint?

 

Good and valid points. You're seeing change, but it's not easy to get an ocean liner to do a U-turn. It's going to take time. This kind of thinking is so new in baseball, but even "scouts-oriented" teams are studying this new way of thinking.

[minnesotacubsfan]

The bigger issue here, of course, is that if the numbers were completely reversed (Cedeno and Perez), Baker would be falling over himself in the media every day doing his best to say how much confidence he has in Neifi, how Neifi has "done it for years," and how he can't afford to just give people playing time based upon ST numbers.

 

The point is that young players, on this team, have to be so above-and-beyond better than the mediocre veteran they're competing with (see Sean Marshall) to even rate an eyebrow raise from Baker. And then, at the slightest bit of faltering, he undermines their position by planting quotes in the paper about how they need to step up.

 

The equation is simple: Perez guarantees you an OBP of .300 or less and a decent glove. Cedeno guarantees you nothing, but the potential for a higher ceiling is there. If, as many people have stated, the year "depends upon the pitching," then putting Cedeno out there costs the Cubs nothing, and has the potential for being a big plus. I don't see what the problem is.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What will be even more interesting is when Murton has a week where he hits .200 (as every player does)...what creaky veteran will see the HollyTime then?

 

Whether it's right or wrong, it's like this on every team in baseball and in many industries: Young workers (or baseball players) have to prove themselves, and experienced hands get the benefit of the doubt. On top of it, the front office signed Neifi to a guaranteed two-year deal.

 

 

You're right about every team in baseball. Except, of course, for the Oakland A's. Sure has hurt their chances this year.

 

The A's haven't played a game yet. We'll see what their chances are.

The Cubs will have two young players, almost rookies, in their starting lineup: Cedeno and Murton. They'll also start a rookie on ESPN Sunday night baseball: Sean Marshall. They also used more young players in spring training than I've seen in nine years of traveling with the team. Let's see how it plays out.

 

Oh, and I picked the A's to win their division.

 

I don't want to be Mr. Moneyball (because I think it can be taken too far), but I just don't understand why baseball is attached to this line of thinking when a team like the A's has proven for nearly 10 years that shrewd use of young players and refusing to overpay for mediocre veterans is not only a successful long-term strategy, but also can work in the short-term (thus insuring the job security so many GMs cite as the reason they stick with mediocre veterans).

 

If I'm running a business and a competitor is doing as well as I am, but doing it more efficiently and with lower costs, I'm going to steal his idea. Why don't GMs get this? Is "traditional values" that powerful of a restraint?

 

this post makse little sense to me. Moneyball=Oakland. most of the MLB does not follow Moneyball...

[frostwyrm]

The bigger issue here, of course, is that if the numbers were completely reversed (Cedeno and Perez), Baker would be falling over himself in the media every day doing his best to say how much confidence he has in Neifi

 

There is precedence for that. Last year when Neifi was in an extended and atrocious slump Dusty excused it by saying Neifi was unlucky. He did the same thing with Estes, and we never heard Dusty put any pressure on Hollandsworth. Holla actually got 2 chances to play himself out of a job he never should have had in the first place.

[Caryatid]

The Braves have done it better than the A's and for longer. Two completely different methods of building the mouse trap. I don't know of any reason why they both can't work, but one thing is for sure, we don't have the organizational talent/philosophy that the Braves do (not referring to players, but that's true too).

 

We promote too fast and don't accurately assess young talent.

 

I don't think the Braves and the A's are all that much different. They both typically have one or two star players, and build around them with good, complimentary young players. The Braves can fill roles with somewhat more expensive players due to their payroll situation, but both seem to value youth over the "known" mediocrity. Very seldom have the Braves taken the "sure thing," and when they did, it typically bit them (Mondesi, etc.)

 

For Braves examples, see Chipper Jones, Andruw Jones, Marcus Giles (during the first incarnation), and obviously now Francoeur, Betemit, etc.

 

I don't think the Cubs promote too fast, I simply think they don't have a structure in place that can allow a young player the opportunity to succeed at the major league level. If you look at the ages of guys like Andruw Jones and Jeff Francoeur when they came in the league, its arguable that they promote much quicker than do the Cubs. Fortunately for them, they have a structure in place at the major leage level with a true teacher as manager (Cox) that allows the players to grow and contribute. Its not an issue of when they get promoted, its how they're dealt with once they get up to the big leagues.

[goonys evil twin]

I don't want to be Mr. Moneyball (because I think it can be taken too far), but I just don't understand why baseball is attached to this line of thinking when a team like the A's has proven for nearly 10 years that shrewd use of young players and refusing to overpay for mediocre veterans is not only a successful long-term strategy, but also can work in the short-term (thus insuring the job security so many GMs cite as the reason they stick with mediocre veterans).

 

If I'm running a business and a competitor is doing as well as I am, but doing it more efficiently and with lower costs, I'm going to steal his idea. Why don't GMs get this? Is "traditional values" that powerful of a restraint?

 

this post makse little sense to me. Moneyball=Oakland. most of the MLB does not follow Moneyball...

 

What doesn't make sense? His point was that most teams don't follow the efficiency model that Oakland uses, even though Oakland has shown it can do a lot more with a lot less than other teams, for a long time. His point was that most teams don't operate that way, and it's stupid that they don't.

[cjbucks]

The Braves have done it better than the A's and for longer. Two completely different methods of building the mouse trap. I don't know of any reason why they both can't work, but one thing is for sure, we don't have the organizational talent/philosophy that the Braves do (not referring to players, but that's true too).

 

We promote too fast and don't accurately assess young talent.

 

I just heard on XM that Cox is probably going to keep Brian Jordan on the roster over some younger guy that hit over 400 in st (forgot his name). Because he looks at his bench and doesn't see any veterans there. He must have a veteran fetish?

[frostwyrm]

The Braves have done it better than the A's and for longer. Two completely different methods of building the mouse trap. I don't know of any reason why they both can't work, but one thing is for sure, we don't have the organizational talent/philosophy that the Braves do (not referring to players, but that's true too).

 

We promote too fast and don't accurately assess young talent.

 

I just heard on XM that Cox is probably going to keep Brian Jordan on the roster over some younger guy that hit over 400 in st (forgot his name). Because he looks at his bench and doesn't see any veterans there. He must have a veteran fetish?

 

Or maybe he's going by Jordan's MLB track record and not some stats compiled over 20 st games.

[goonys evil twin]

I'm reading this thread in the Phoenix airport.

 

Time to relax: Ronny Cedeno will be the opening-day shortstop and will be given every opportunity to keep the job. Period. How many reporters did you see making a big deal of this? This is one of Dusty's rambles that morphed from a discussion about a "platoon" at second base. While there is legit concern given Dusty's history, it's no time to panic. Ronny will get his chance. He's got to relax and just play, which is what I think he'll do.

 

Heading home and then on to Cincy Sunday.

 

I did notice that most writers did not make a big deal of the quote.

 

But I've feared for quite some time that Ronny will be on an incredibly short leash. And while it's true that most teams operate this way, that doesn't make it a sound practice. So it doesn't take much to start worrying.

 

Ronny has to be given a chance to fail, and fail badly, then get the chance to play through it and rebound before being replaced by such dead weight as Neifi.

[goonys evil twin]

The Braves have done it better than the A's and for longer. Two completely different methods of building the mouse trap. I don't know of any reason why they both can't work, but one thing is for sure, we don't have the organizational talent/philosophy that the Braves do (not referring to players, but that's true too).

 

We promote too fast and don't accurately assess young talent.

 

I just heard on XM that Cox is probably going to keep Brian Jordan on the roster over some younger guy that hit over 400 in st (forgot his name). Because he looks at his bench and doesn't see any veterans there. He must have a veteran fetish?

 

Everybody is going to have some level of faith in veterans over kids. Bobby Cox has enough history of putting faith in younger players to excuse him from occasionally going with a guy like Jordan. I wouldn't be all that interested in that kid's spring training numbers, as opposed to his career numbers as a pro. But for what it's worth, Jordan is having a great spring, so if you want to use that as your excuse, it doesn't make much sense. Plus, what is the kid's storyline? Is he a 22 year old solid prospect who can use some more seasoning playing everyday, as opposed to being on the bench. Would being a major league bench player slow his progress?

 

And I don't know many people who have advocated benches with zero veterans, so if most of the guys are younger and Brian is the sole aged one, that's not that big of a deal.

[minnesotacubsfan]

I don't want to be Mr. Moneyball (because I think it can be taken too far), but I just don't understand why baseball is attached to this line of thinking when a team like the A's has proven for nearly 10 years that shrewd use of young players and refusing to overpay for mediocre veterans is not only a successful long-term strategy, but also can work in the short-term (thus insuring the job security so many GMs cite as the reason they stick with mediocre veterans).

 

If I'm running a business and a competitor is doing as well as I am, but doing it more efficiently and with lower costs, I'm going to steal his idea. Why don't GMs get this? Is "traditional values" that powerful of a restraint?

 

this post makse little sense to me. Moneyball=Oakland. most of the MLB does not follow Moneyball...

 

What doesn't make sense? His point was that most teams don't follow the efficiency model that Oakland uses, even though Oakland has shown it can do a lot more with a lot less than other teams, for a long time. His point was that most teams don't operate that way, and it's stupid that they don't.

 

to clarify:

 

I read:

 

"I don't want to be Mr. Moneyball (because I think it can be taken too far), but I just don't understand why baseball is attached to this line of thinking"

 

This to me reads as if MLB's prevailing thought process is Moneyball..but:

 

"A's has proven for nearly 10 years that shrewd use of young players and refusing to overpay for mediocre veterans is not only a successful long-term strategy, but also can work in the short-term"

 

It simply read as if Oakland was opposed to Moneyball...which as I understand it, they are not. The wording of the post is unclear. I agree with it, and it took me awhile to make sense of it (and only did through others posts), but it isnt written well...hence my questioning...

 

sorry for being the grammar police, I just wasnt sure what the poster was saying...

 

edit: for my own grammar :wall:

[Caryatid]

(and only did through others posts), but it isnt written well...hence my questioning...

 

sorry for being the grammar police, I just wasnt sure what the poster was saying...

 

edit: for my own grammar :wall:

 

(sarcasm on)Dang, man...you gotta throw the grammar thing in my face? (sarcasm off)

 

 

I didn't think it was all that unclear. Then again, I wrote it.

 

I was simply stating that I didn't want to be perceived as a blind Billy Beane supporter, but the A's have done it, for the most part, the right way for ten years.

[JakeSlater]

I'm reading this thread in the Phoenix airport.

 

Time to relax: Ronny Cedeno will be the opening-day shortstop and will be given every opportunity to keep the job. Period. How many reporters did you see making a big deal of this? This is one of Dusty's rambles that morphed from a discussion about a "platoon" at second base. While there is legit concern given Dusty's history, it's no time to panic. Ronny will get his chance. He's got to relax and just play, which is what I think he'll do.

 

Heading home and then on to Cincy Sunday.

 

I did notice that most writers did not make a big deal of the quote.

 

But I've feared for quite some time that Ronny will be on an incredibly short leash. And while it's true that most teams operate this way, that doesn't make it a sound practice. So it doesn't take much to start worrying.

 

Ronny has to be given a chance to fail, and fail badly, then get the chance to play through it and rebound before being replaced by such dead weight as Neifi.

 

Neifi guarantees ONLY a .300 OBP?

 

That was ONE YEAR! Worst OBP in his career. He could have a .330-.340 year for all we know.

 

And that guy is FAR from dead weight, man.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

(and only did through others posts), but it isnt written well...hence my questioning...

 

sorry for being the grammar police, I just wasnt sure what the poster was saying...

 

edit: for my own grammar :wall:

 

(sarcasm on)Dang, man...you gotta throw the grammar thing in my face? (sarcasm off)

 

 

I didn't think it was all that unclear. Then again, I wrote it.

 

I was simply stating that I didn't want to be perceived as a blind Billy Beane supporter, but the A's have done it, for the most part, the right way for ten years.

 

He's from Minnesota. Enough said. :wink:

[minnesotacubsfan]

(and only did through others posts), but it isnt written well...hence my questioning...

 

sorry for being the grammar police, I just wasnt sure what the poster was saying...

 

edit: for my own grammar :wall:

 

(sarcasm on)Dang, man...you gotta throw the grammar thing in my face? (sarcasm off)

 

 

I didn't think it was all that unclear. Then again, I wrote it.

 

I was simply stating that I didn't want to be perceived as a blind Billy Beane supporter, but the A's have done it, for the most part, the right way for ten years.

 

 

sorry man....I just wasnt understanding what you wrote...but on that note, I gotta say I totally agree with ya

 

 

:wtg: