6/11 Cubs (Dempster) @ Astros (Ortiz) 1:05 CSN

[Arnold Layne]

That wasn't the point at all. DeRosa and Edmonds were brought up out of a discussion of the pros and cons of Hendry as GM in regards to his FA signings and you stated that Hendry only had 2 good years as a GM based on his FA signings. You singled out 2008 as one of those years due specifically to Edmonds and DeRosa despite DeRosa having been signed the year before. Unless you're saying the signing of DeRosa didn't become a good one until Edmonds was signed during the 2008 season (which would be a rather silly and backwards argument), that information throws a spanner into your reasoning as to why 2008 was one of Hendry's only good FA years. The discussion was in no way about how Edmonds and DeRosa helped make the lineup better last year compared to this year. It was about Hendry himself and his FA signings.

 

Go back and read the thread, Mojo Pin.The comments about DeRosa and Edmonds were bought up when I talked about how the 2008 lineup had more offensive talent, and I was happy for Hendry "putting it together" in 2008. Wether DeRosa was added in 2007 is irrelevent in the obvious context of the 2008 team having more offensive talent.

 

I don't think I've ever seen someone so desperate to argue semantics as you.

[Sammy Sofa]

Amazing.

 

You're the one that brought up Hendry having only two good FA signing years. You're the one that said those years were 2003 and 2008 (the latter supposedly because of DeRosa and Edmonds) despite DeRosa having been signed in 2007. That's not "semantics": that's an error that completely dismisses your idea that 2008 was a good FA year if you're saying it was because of signing Edmonds and DeRosa.

[Arnold Layne]

You're hopeless.