Olerud363

Law abiding poster since joining the old forum... 2007 or so. One account, never been banned. Never posted under a different name.

Fair enough. And that's the way to handle it. I have no problems with this type of feedback. My problem with EJCF is that a) he implied there was something even more to the post. It was a "Beeston is a buffoon post", annoying?? Fair feedback. Silly?? sure. Distracting from the original topic... Maybe..But I don't think so. I was only contrasting the devastated look of many blue jays in the collage to the "hellava job" always on Beeston's face. he publically requested the post be deleted which is the very definition of trolling (get a reaction). When you really find a post objectional and want it deleted one cann privately and discretely talks to the mods about the infraction. When you want troll the poster you publically post "Mods delete this drivel".

btw... And in case you are seeing some weird innuendo in the term "cigar smoking" (rather then the simple buffonish charicture of Beeston as here http://blogs.thescore.com/djf/2013/07/08/why-even-bother-paul-beeston/)... that is unpleasant and is more of a reflection on your own creepiness then anything else.

If the Mod's are do anything they should discipline you. You and a couple of others take everything (that doesn't please) you the wrong way. You assume the absolute worst of every comment. http://blogs.thescore.com/djf/2013/07/08/why-even-bother-paul-beeston/ What the hell was wrong with the comment?? Many people see Beeston as a cigar smoking weirdo who smiles and smokes his cigars while everything goes to hell around him. You may not agree with that. You seem like a coorporate guy, a young coorporate bro, finance guy with the inside knowledge and smarts to beat the market. On your way up in the world unlike me, unemployed, delusional loser. There's nothing creepy about a Beeston-hater. Calling me a jealous loser, jealous of Beeston, jealous of hip coorporate bros like yourself... that would be more accurate.

?? Sometimes this board confuses the hell out of me. The OP posted a compilation of Blue Jays figures looking very updset over what happened. I contrasted this to the pictures you see of Beeston, smiling, laughing, assuming that victory is just around the corner. I think others in the organization have an awareness of reality. Beeston does not (in my humble opinion) DJF (as much as I was upset with Stoeten on occastion) does a good of explaining the culture. http://blogs.thescore.com/djf/2013/07/08/why-even-bother-paul-beeston/

I hope Beeston see's this. Beeston doesn't understand who he is. He isn't self aware of who he is, what he has done. The damage he has caused. Nice picture of AA and Blue Jays realizing they are failures, Farrell enjoying his victory, I compare these to the pictures I see of the Beest smoking his cigar and thinking "95 wins next year!". Damn Beest is so delusional. Beest to Jays 2013 is as George W. Bush is to Katrina -- helluva Job Brownie! Nice work. Truly funny, must-see viewing for the Beest, if anyone knows a way to reach him.

But that is assuming that the players are automatically replaced by 0 WAR guys. Edit - the original way I did it was wrong. Should assume trout (+20) replaces Rasmus (+5??) So if you assumed Bautista and EE are replaced by 1 WAR guys, and that EE + Bautista + Rasmus are worth 10 in a give year. Trout + 2 =12 EE + Bautista + Rasmus= 10 2 WAR guys Trout + 4 = 14 EE + Bautista + Rasmus = 10 So the analysis depends on how you replace Bautista and EE. For a team with a great farm (with mlb ready sluggers) or unlimited pockets (and good relationship with agents -- hello Choo) it could work.

A lot of my feelings on proposed trades (EE for Price, Bautista for Brown+) are based on assuming these steep declines after 30. That we are returning to an era where after 30 guys go quick. Even younger players look to be declining right away though. I probably am over-estimating the improvement guys like Brown and Beckham have left in them (ie none, other than random variation).

I have voted for you as best Manager of a financial institiution. If this is verified to be untrue then I give the forum minds permission to change the vote to worst troll.

Best Manager at large Financial Institution: MohYou

I wasn't under the impression that they'd be calling these guys up to Toronto any time soon. Figured they'd just have 3 or 4 scatterred in the system. Perhaps the negative is that it would be to much of a distraction (for the milb staff and catchers) then it is worth????????

Yeah. It's lotto 6-49. Buy some tickets. As long as it doesn't interfere with other tickets.

But who cares as long as the bet isn't for that much. If they are betting Syndegard on it then OK. Bad idea. If they are just signing and working with fringe guys looking for a lottery ticket it's not a big deal.

Yes. .320 .373 .455 against lefties. Young. Upside.

What about the team and an agreement with Rogers that they have to pay you a crazy sum for broadcast rights, enough so you have cash to run a top 5 payroll years to come?? Ruler, CEO, King for life. Beeston and AA have to agree to stay on for a couple of weeks so you can fire them in dramatic fashion.

I have a hard time believing Beeston knows who Beckham is. I have a hard time believing he know who Brandon Phillips is either... but tell him Phillips got 100 rbis and he'd approve Lawrie, Sanchez, Stroman and Gose.

People got to believe in the invisible hand, the free market and the will of the people. If you don't like a thread ignore it, if your neighbours do the same the thread will naturally die. The funny thing is a few idiots always yammer about how bad a thread is thus drawing attention to it and moving it up.

David Ortiz - 108 ops+ with Minn. Morrison 107+ with Florida. Not saying Morrison = Ortiz... but hesistant to declare by decree that he is not worthy of discussion.

Unbelievable that he broadcast that a few weeks ago... On the Ninja station with material generated for the casual fans... especially the number one casual Paul Beeston. Easily digestable on coffee break from the Loblaws board meeting,

I probably should tone it down a bit on this, so let me explain rationally. Farrell's budies in Cleveland basically have said that Farrell was treated badly. Putting it all together we have comments from Farrell regarding hiring his Boston hitting coach, comments from Lind regarding Farrell vs. Murphy, comments from Farrell regarding "Player development", long standing comments from Beeston/Gaston/Murphy regarding philosaphy on player development and hitting approach (old is good, pull is good, opfield is bad, oba is bad). My guess is Farrell wanted an on base ish team and had a lot of thoughts on player development. Cito still has Beeston's ear so Beeston basically thought the opposite of Farrell. AA was really hired to implement Beeston's vision (starting with a year long retirement ceramony for Cito) so AA is powerless. Beeston didn't like or listen to Farrell, and thus the reported tension extended to AA and Farrell (AAs is only there to fulfill Beeston's wishes, like anybody has to for their boss). In the end Farrell didn't get screwed, got his dream job and won the World Series. It would be more accurate to say that Beeston and Farrell did not see eye to eye, Beeston didn't take Farrell's ideas seriously.... Farrell in the end went to be part of a team where everybody was on the same page.

Both Boras and Beeston are master politicians... they aren't like us, little guys on the internet. We get into a war with someone, we make our hate and discust at them pulbically known and battle them with fierce intensity on the internet message boards... Boras and Beeston have a war... it's a gentlemen's war. These guys don't want the little guys like us even aware of their war... we're not worthy of being privy to it. So it's cupcakes and roses publically... but behind the scenes different story.

Beeston is a monster. An absolutely evil man. Others are better at politics then I am so pull their punches. Basicially Beeston was bitter and screwed Paxton by dropping hints to NCAA and caused Paxton to lose NCAA eligibility. It apparently went to a lawsuit (between Pax and NCAA). The comments floating around about the Blue Jays screwing Farrell "their not good people", there's a reason for that. Beeston isn't good people. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Because it was Scott, the way you deal, you deal through him," Beeston said. "You don't deal through the family." Amateur ballplayers are allowed to have so-called "family advisers," but risk forfeiting NCAA eligibility if "agents" become too involved in contract negotiations. It's a fine line, and there is a wink-and-nudge nature to the dance. "That's how it operates," father Ted Paxton said. "It's just that it came to the attention of the NCAA." Ted Paxton said the family was "surprised and confused" by Beeston's remarks, but is not bitter.

In my mind much of it goes back to Cito Gaston. Gaston seems to be blackballed by everybody except Beeston. Gillick hated him, the players don't like him, he made a lot poor moves. Never got a sniff of a job from anybody but Beeston. And then claimed racissm when at the same time other minority managers (Dusty Baker, Felibe Alou) were being given multiple jobs. Bobcat has basically said Gaston is an awful man who turned 100 win teams into 95 win teams and got lucky in the playoffs. Any other president would of fired Gaston after the 2009 disaster... where the team collapsed into mutiny. No experienced GM or up and coming Gm candidate would of taken the job without being given full authority to resolve that situation by firing Gaston if needed. The only choice?? Beeston had to hire himself as President, and a young guy he knew and could control as GM.

In the book AA is hemming and hawwing over the trade. In the end he doesn't want to screw Jeff Mathis over it. To me that says AA was lukewarm on it anyway. Then Beeston is literally schmoozing with his buddies in a Loblaws board meeting, and takes AAs call on a coffee brake and is all like "Track Team!!! Entertainment!!!!' Beeston is probably pissed he has to talk to AA on the coffee break at the Loblaws board meeting (I picture them getting to preview the newest Presidents Choice cookies)... "Crush Mathis! Get the track team! I need some entertainment. And stop bothering me I'm sampling the new cookies!!!".

I am certainly not questioning your conclusion... but I am questioning the confidence you have in the conclusion. This topic is getting the same feedback as the "J.P. Arencibia for DH" got. If the peanut gallery gives every topic they don't agree with the same treatment (yer dumb... shut it down... what the hell is wrong with you) then it becomes hard to separate the truly stupid ideas (J.P. Arencibia for DH) from debatable ideas. The premise that EE is as valuable as Price and LoMo (thus when factoring in contract status he becomes way more valuable) relies on a few things... 1. That Price isn't quite as good as he appears because of Pitch Framing (Molina is helping him). 2. LoMo's defense is ridiculously awful (-2 WAR by some measurements) and wouldn't improve as a full time 1b . 3. We understand why players like EE and Bautista all of a sudden get better near 30 and we can predict their 30s with confidence. People are also assuming that the series of deals would be EE straight up for Price, and something else for LoMo... there are no other parts to this. Again I am not saying you are wrong... I am saying I personally don't understand points 1 to 3 well enough to confidently state that EE is a 4 WAR player, and Price is a 4 WAR player going forward and LoMo is 0. If there are things in the data we don't understand, it could be that EE is 3.5, LoMo is 2 and Price is 5... It could also be that EE is 4 going forward, LoMo is 0 and Price is 2.5 (assuming some very negative injury model for Price). I do appreciate a link to a blog describing the problem in more detail. Much better then "what the hell is wrong with you".