Links

Friday, December 07, 2012

Looking Good?

It looks like I jumped the gun on Shank a few days ago. Today's column summarizes the recent efforts by the Red Sox to change their roster for the 2013 season. Since I generally don't give a rat's ass about baseball, I will avoid weighing in on each acquisition and potential trade rumors (i.e., Lester and Ellsbury), but will instead point out 'interesting' parts of the column.
That’s right, people. This nattering nabob of negativity is happy to see the Red Sox overpaying for the likes of Shane Victorino, Mike Napoli, Jonny Gomes, and David Ross (there’s no truth to the rumor that I just made up Ben Cherington was walking about Nashville saying, “three-year, $39 million contracts for everybody!”).
Shank has no problem with the perceived overspending now; he'll be singing a different tune if / when the Sox hit their first serious losing streak. He's on the bandwagon now; will he be riding shotgun in early June?
These new faces are believed to be “character” guys. Victorino, Napoli, and Gomes are legitimate big-league ballplayers who have played on the biggest stage. They represent an improvement over the people in the pitiful lineups submitted by goofball Bobby Valentine in September 2012.
Shank just loves goofballs. Or used to...
Do I care that the Sox overpaid for Messrs. Napoli and Victorino? Do I care that the Sox gave David Ortiz a two-year contract (a.k.a. lifetime achievement award) when Ortiz had no bidders for his services? Not a bit. It’s not my money.
Did you ever think Shank would ever write that last sentence? Me neither.
Building for the future. There’s the issue. If the Red Sox are building for the future, they should be all about scouting and player development. They should admit that they will be terrible this year and get on with their future. They should save their money for better free agent classes.

But it’s hard to do this in Boston.
Mainly because of nattering nabobs of negativity like Shank, who will shit on the Red Sox players, managment and ownership at the drop of a hat.

No comments: