My main problem is I can't critisize someone for making a move (or lack of a move) when I, myself, agreed with it when it was made. Burroughs was pretty good last year, for the most part, and I saw no reason why he shouldn't continue to improve. Granted he didn't display much power last year, but I attributed that to him being forced into the leadoff spot. The bottom line is I, too, wanted him starting at third this year so I won't critisize Towers for thinking the same thing. IMO it didn't become
obvious that Burroughs needed to be replaced until we were already well into this season...and even then not till June-ish. (Burroughs was on a tear even before the May streak. He was hitting something like .330 late April, early May) And since, at least in my opinion, it wasn't obvious that we needed something done for third base until mid-season that's where all my logic I put forth applies in that it takes time to make deals and decide which one will be the best.
By the way, The Red Sox probably did nix the deal due to not wanting Burroughs...but keep in mind that they did this
after Burroughs proceeded to produce the horrid year he's been having (minus a slightly hot April)
And you say no one's advoacating rash moves, and I'm sure you aren't when you think of that concept at face value, but when someone complains about them "waiting till the last second to fix the issue" that implies to me that the complainer wanted something done ASAP once it became obvioius that there was an issue to begin with.
Well to me it means just what it says "they waited until the last minute", nothing more nothing less....we've been in here for the whole year talking about things like this, including Burroughs, so you can't say that it's something that just now came up. Also at the end of last year they had started talking about the lack of production by Burroughs, and how that wasn't going to be something they continued to allow. All I was trying to say is that you could see very early by Burroughs SOFT .300 with nearly no extra base hits, that the power wasn't developing, and IMO a move should have been made in May, or at least seriously explored in May, not just a platoon job.
Now, if you simply think it was obvious that we needed a new third baseman before the season even started (even though you, yourself stated that you haven't given up on Burroughs yet) then we simply have a difference in opinion...or at least had one.
As far as "this team has holes that have been there for years" I have to slightly disagree with this as well. Centerfield hasn't always been a hole, it wasn't a hole until we created it by filling in the hole behind the plate.
Who probably wont be here next year CF has been a hole since Finley left, that's a few years ago now, Kotsay underperformed, Payton was a joke, and as much as I like the sparkplug that is Dave Roberts, he's a 4th OFer at best for just about any team (an everday starter Towers has managed to acquire, I might add) And even then, the only knock on the replacement for this year (Dave Roberts) is that he gets hurt a bit too much.
Third base, at least in my opinion..and i'm sure Towers' as well based on his actions, or lack therof..wasn't an obvious hole until this year and Towers went ahead and filled that void with Joe Randa, albeit temporarily. (as I don't think 35 yr old Randa is a permanant fix)
I agree, and would like to see Burroughs succeed, but if he's not able, he's got to be replaced. We can't have projects at a power position anymore.
5th starter has been a clutch, and with limited payroll, may very well always be one. (we probably agree on a slight issue in that regard, so no need to go off on a tangent on that)
Fair Enough
I'm not completely a Towers defender, as I said I just can't find myself critisizing someone for making moves that I agreed with at the time, even if they do prove to be the wrong one in the end. But, at the same time, they are proving to be the wrong ones anyways, so I won't argue against a change in office either. But to respond to the above quote, none of that would really look bad on him if the players he gave those contracts to played to the level that they were expected to when they were signed.
Like Bubba Trammel? So the only real shot in that quote is the last one (player choices). Well that, and the NTC, as i'm growing a disliking of the concept of handing that out regardless of who you give it to.
Basically, nobody would argue if Towers were to give a back loaded contract to Jake Peavy or Khalil Greene right now, but if they stopped producing when the backloaded end of the contract came up, all of a sudden KT would (yet again) be public enemy number one....which is pretty much what happend with Phil Nevin when he signed a contract extention right after hitting 41 HRs and 100+ RBIs in a season.