Commenting On The Comments

Everyone has something to say nowadays, even if its completely asinine. Sadly, while the internet is a great vehicle for information, its also a great way for idiots to express whatever moronic, misspelled, twitter-length, dimly lit, pigeon-like thoughts that flutter through their cranium during commercial breaks of American Idol. Comments on mainstream media sports websites are particularly awful.

So, for some Monday fun, lets take a sampling of some reader comments from around the web.

First up, this article by Ken Rosenthal of Fox Sports about how the Washington Nationals are going to draft college pitcher Steven Strasburg with the number one overall choice in the 2009 MLB draft. This is not exactly news as the Nationals have been outright saying they are going to pick Strasburg for months despite his "adviser" Scott Boras floating signing bonuses of $50M.

To all that, 'tommysquip' had the following he just had to add to the conversation:
.

if boras get's his wish of 50 mill. ,then each year going forward will start at 50.mil. plus baseball should put the cap on this right away make so they can't sign for more than 10% than the previous year period. 50 MILLION IS WAY OVER THE TOP !!

Where to start? I guess the use of capslock to viciously pound home your point with the subtly of my infant son pooping is my favorite. tommysquip knows that two exclamation points simply aren't enough, you HAVE to capitalize THE ENTIRE SENTENCE otherwise nobody WILL take YOU seriously.

.

As for the content, unless tommysquip is part owner of the Nationals, who gives a diaper brim'n with baby turds what they give Strasburg to sign? Nobody gets up in arms about what Brad Pitt gets to make movies, but people feel the need to arbitrarily assign value to ballplayers based on zero information. If Strasburg is as good as everyone seems to think he is, spending $50M on him will be well worth it.

.

Next up, we've got this article from the Boston Globe by Tony Massarotti. Massarotti intricately details the Red Sox strengths and weaknesses and suggests ways to improve the ball club. Great idea for an article, by the way! Reader 'procrastination' makes the following suggestion:

.

Trade Lugo, Dice-K (we pay at least half) and Bowden for Hanley Ramirez (assuming he's healthy).

Genius! Alert John Henry to fire Theo Epstein and hire procrastination instead! I mean, other than the fact that the Marlins would never do this trade because they'd be taking on about $60 in salary, almost double their 2009 payroll of $36M, and giving up their best player all for three players who don't address any weaknesses on their ballclub. But, other than those minor quibbles, its genius, I tell you! GENIUS! [stabs spork in eye]

.

Our final (thank the Flying Spaghetti Monster) comment comes to us via this article in the NY Times Bats Blog. The article outlines the many options the Red Sox have to improve their team and compares (vaguely) them to the Yankees who have comparatively few. Commenter Tanned Tom had the following to say:

.

I agree with the first poster, their starting pitching has not been a strength. How is it possible for this writer to get paid for such shoddy work? Guys should at least be able to look up a staff’s E.R.A. before writing this gargage.

Tanned Tom is referring to the first commenter who wrote this:
.

Yankees > Red Sox

Learn it. Know it. Live it.

.

Hard to disagree with analysis like that, huh? Also, what is "gargage" and what does it have to do with the article?