<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: ESPN: The Worldwide Leader in Dumb</title>
	<atom:link href="http://natnotes.com/2007/01/26/espn-the-worldwide-leader-in-dumb/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://natnotes.com/2007/01/26/espn-the-worldwide-leader-in-dumb/</link>
	<description>Accept no imitations!</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 11:09:32 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: jakarta</title>
		<link>http://natnotes.com/2007/01/26/espn-the-worldwide-leader-in-dumb/#comment-465</link>
		<dc:creator>jakarta</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Jan 2007 06:25:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://notesfromthenat.com/?p=297#comment-465</guid>
		<description>Nice post Oz,

2004 was 2002 â€œMoneyballâ€ redux. They had several high picks and had to still be somewhat economical in the cash outlays.

Suzuki, Street, Windsor, Braden, Mellilo, and Connor Robertson were all undoubtedly very good picks for their spots. If Chad Boyd can hit in AA, then he becomes a clear success at his slot.

Powell is hard to know, but Iâ€™d be surprised if he didnâ€™t become a slightly better Adam Melhuse. Powell was a cheap sign anyway to conserve money for other picks.

Robnett? Who knows? I think by June of this year weâ€™ll know how he projects. He looked good in AA before going down for the season.

Webb to my untrained eye, has makeup issues. He has a great pitcherâ€™s body and plenty of juice in his arm, but he gets frazzled easy and stops trusting his stuff.

Putnam? can hit some. Canâ€™t do much else.

Street and Windsor already made the draft decent, to become a really good draft, we need a little more. The key to the draft though is Suzuki. If he is a legit starter for the Aâ€™s, then the draft was a clear success. Anyone else Robnett, Mellilo, Putnam, Braden, Robertson, Powell chips in on the big club, and itâ€™s just extra.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice post Oz,</p>
<p>2004 was 2002 â€œMoneyballâ€ redux. They had several high picks and had to still be somewhat economical in the cash outlays.</p>
<p>Suzuki, Street, Windsor, Braden, Mellilo, and Connor Robertson were all undoubtedly very good picks for their spots. If Chad Boyd can hit in AA, then he becomes a clear success at his slot.</p>
<p>Powell is hard to know, but Iâ€™d be surprised if he didnâ€™t become a slightly better Adam Melhuse. Powell was a cheap sign anyway to conserve money for other picks.</p>
<p>Robnett? Who knows? I think by June of this year weâ€™ll know how he projects. He looked good in AA before going down for the season.</p>
<p>Webb to my untrained eye, has makeup issues. He has a great pitcherâ€™s body and plenty of juice in his arm, but he gets frazzled easy and stops trusting his stuff.</p>
<p>Putnam? can hit some. Canâ€™t do much else.</p>
<p>Street and Windsor already made the draft decent, to become a really good draft, we need a little more. The key to the draft though is Suzuki. If he is a legit starter for the Aâ€™s, then the draft was a clear success. Anyone else Robnett, Mellilo, Putnam, Braden, Robertson, Powell chips in on the big club, and itâ€™s just extra.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
