Totally Unreadable

[Saul Goodman]

Bruce Levine's trade ideas and analysis. Thank God he isn't the GM because they are almost uniformly awful. He must have been valedictorian of his class at the Phil Rogers College of Baseball Transactions.

[InternetApex]

http://www.desipio.com/messageboard/index.php?action=profile;u=243;sa=showPosts

[Oleg]

http://www.desipio.com/messageboard/index.php?action=profile;u=243;sa=showPosts

I disagree.  I enjoy reading those posts.  I sit back and laugh and laugh.

[Oleg]

Bruce Levine's trade ideas and analysis. Thank God he isn't the GM because they are almost uniformly awful. He must have been valedictorian of his class at the Phil Rogers College of Baseball Transactions.

DPD.

I almost want to ask for a link.

[Saul Goodman]

MLBTR's constant fellating of Peter Gammons as if contractually mandated.

In his latest column at GammonsDaily.com, legendary journalist Peter Gammons writes that

lol

[Eli]

MLBTR's constant fellating of Peter Gammons as if contractually mandated.

In his latest column at GammonsDaily.com, legendary journalist Peter Gammons writes that

lol

I don't see anything wrong with that.

[SKO]

MLBTR's constant fellating of Peter Gammons as if contractually mandated.

In his latest column at GammonsDaily.com, legendary journalist Peter Gammons writes that

lol

I don't see anything wrong with that.

Who doesn't like Peter Gammons?

[InternetApex]

MLBTR's constant fellating of Peter Gammons as if contractually mandated.

In his latest column at GammonsDaily.com, legendary journalist Peter Gammons writes that

lol

I don't see anything wrong with that.

Who doesn't like Peter Gammons?

Yankees fans?

[Eli]

MLBTR's constant fellating of Peter Gammons as if contractually mandated.

In his latest column at GammonsDaily.com, legendary journalist Peter Gammons writes that

lol

I don't see anything wrong with that.

Who doesn't like Peter Gammons?

Legendary journalism critic Sterling Archer, I guess.

[Saul Goodman]

MLBTR's constant fellating of Peter Gammons as if contractually mandated.

In his latest column at GammonsDaily.com, legendary journalist Peter Gammons writes that

lol

I don't see anything wrong with that.

Who doesn't like Peter Gammons?

Legendary journalism critic Sterling Archer, I guess.

He's a fine baseball reporter but that's hardly the stuff of legends.

However, Gammons notes that the Sox have considered the move, thinking that he could help them make a run and that a rental might give them an inside edge on signing him in free agency. Gammons is the second journalist to mention this today, as WEEI.com's Rob Bradford offered a similar take earlier.

Only legends are redundant!

[Eli]

MLBTR's constant fellating of Peter Gammons as if contractually mandated.

In his latest column at GammonsDaily.com, legendary journalist Peter Gammons writes that

lol

I don't see anything wrong with that.

Who doesn't like Peter Gammons?

Legendary journalism critic Sterling Archer, I guess.

He's a fine baseball reporter but that's hardly the stuff of legends.

However, Gammons notes that the Sox have considered the move, thinking that he could help them make a run and that a rental might give them an inside edge on signing him in free agency. Gammons is the second journalist to mention this today, as WEEI.com's Rob Bradford offered a similar take earlier.

Only legends are redundant!

Semantics, sure. But if you have to call any baseball reporter legendary (and I realize no one is making us do that), Gammons is probably about as qualified as it gets.

[Saul Goodman]

MLBTR's constant fellating of Peter Gammons as if contractually mandated.

In his latest column at GammonsDaily.com, legendary journalist Peter Gammons writes that

lol

I don't see anything wrong with that.

Who doesn't like Peter Gammons?

Legendary journalism critic Sterling Archer, I guess.

He's a fine baseball reporter but that's hardly the stuff of legends.

However, Gammons notes that the Sox have considered the move, thinking that he could help them make a run and that a rental might give them an inside edge on signing him in free agency. Gammons is the second journalist to mention this today, as WEEI.com's Rob Bradford offered a similar take earlier.

Only legends are redundant!

Semantics, sure. But if you have to call any baseball reporter legendary (and I realize no one is making us do that), Gammons is probably about as qualified as it gets.

Fair enough.

[InternetApex]

MLBTR's constant fellating of Peter Gammons as if contractually mandated.

In his latest column at GammonsDaily.com, legendary journalist Peter Gammons writes that

lol

I don't see anything wrong with that.

Who doesn't like Peter Gammons?

Legendary journalism critic Sterling Archer, I guess.

He's a fine baseball reporter but that's hardly the stuff of legends.

However, Gammons notes that the Sox have considered the move, thinking that he could help them make a run and that a rental might give them an inside edge on signing him in free agency. Gammons is the second journalist to mention this today, as WEEI.com's Rob Bradford offered a similar take earlier.

Only legends are redundant!

Semantics, sure. But if you have to call any baseball reporter legendary (and I realize no one is making us do that), Gammons is probably about as qualified as it gets.

Fair enough.

I've always thought Gammons was a guy. He was on ESPN so he got more face time than every other baseball reporter. He never really pissed me off by writing/saying ludicrous shit and I always felt like he kept his hot takes to himself which made him the anti-Costas. So he's had this really incredible run of being heard from a lot and not making me mad. That's got to count for something at some point. Legendary, I guess, by default.

[Yeti]

MLBTR's constant fellating of Peter Gammons as if contractually mandated.

In his latest column at GammonsDaily.com, legendary journalist Peter Gammons writes that

lol

I don't see anything wrong with that.

Who doesn't like Peter Gammons?

Legendary journalism critic Sterling Archer, I guess.

He's a fine baseball reporter but that's hardly the stuff of legends.

However, Gammons notes that the Sox have considered the move, thinking that he could help them make a run and that a rental might give them an inside edge on signing him in free agency. Gammons is the second journalist to mention this today, as WEEI.com's Rob Bradford offered a similar take earlier.

Only legends are redundant!

Semantics, sure. But if you have to call any baseball reporter legendary (and I realize no one is making us do that), Gammons is probably about as qualified as it gets.

Fair enough.

I've always thought Gammons was a guy. He was on ESPN so he got more face time than every other baseball reporter. He never really pissed me off by writing/saying ludicrous shit and I always felt like he kept his hot takes to himself which made him the anti-Costas. So he's had this really incredible run of being heard from a lot and not making me mad. That's got to count for something at some point. Legendary, I guess, by default.

Plus, he asstweets sometimes, so I like him

[Eli]

I've always thought Gammons was a guy. He was on ESPN so he got more face time than every other baseball reporter. He never really pissed me off by writing/saying ludicrous shit and I always felt like he kept his hot takes to himself which made him the anti-Costas. So he's had this really incredible run of being heard from a lot and not making me mad. That's got to count for something at some point. Legendary, I guess, by default.

It's definitely a little bit one-eyed man in the kingdom of the blind. I have really respected how he seemed to evolve with the times, especially for a guy who's been in the business for almost 50 years. He picked up on a lot of the stat stuff pretty early on and seemed to embrace it.