8/7/2014 Mookie sent down---again

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: 8/7/2014 Mookie sent down---again

    Fo sho, boyeeeeeeeeeeeeee

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: 8/7/2014 Mookie sent down---again

    In response to BogieAt12oclock's comment:

    As bad as this SOX team is, I'm not sure going to Pawtucket is 'being sent down.'



    it's now called being "sent up."

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from georom4. Show georom4's posts

    Re: 8/7/2014 Mookie sent down---again

    Why wasnt every veteran on this team told after the trade deadline that we are playing the rookies and it is their job to help guide them to reaching their full potential (along with the coaches) Its called mentoring and it happens in every industry. I have no desire to see Pedroia, Napoli, or papi trotted out there to pad their meaningless stats - 2 of them should be sitting every game


     


     


     


    As always - 100% correct!


     


     


     


     

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from ctredsoxfanhugh. Show ctredsoxfanhugh's posts

    Re: 8/7/2014 Mookie sent down---again

    In response to georom4's comment:

    Why wasnt every veteran on this team told after the trade deadline that we are playing the rookies and it is their job to help guide them to reaching their full potential (along with the coaches) Its called mentoring and it happens in every industry. I have no desire to see Pedroia, Napoli, or papi trotted out there to pad their meaningless stats - 2 of them should be sitting every game

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    As always - 100% correct!

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     



    Really???? In what universe do players of their caliber sit every other game??

    That....literally....never happens. 

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from ctredsoxfanhugh. Show ctredsoxfanhugh's posts

    Re: 8/7/2014 Mookie sent down---again

    By that logic 1/2 the teams in the league should just sit their starters and call up the triple A team. 

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from georom4. Show georom4's posts

    Re: 8/7/2014 Mookie sent down---again

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:

    By that logic 1/2 the teams in the league should just sit their starters and call up the triple A team. 




    any team that gives away 1/3 of their team and 4/5 of their starters has already made this decision

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: 8/7/2014 Mookie sent down---again

    I'm with geo...The Sox FO made this mess and you can't really figure out what they are doing...Take Nava for instance. If you look at things lately, he probably should play every day, but if this is about the future, he probably shouldn't play at all. Is he in their plans? Or is Holt their 4th OF next year? What is it? There is ZERO PLAN...They could actually announce a plan and that would also serve notice to the veterans that this is a unique time in Sox history where they need to showcase and play youngsters to make determinations about their immediate future...whether it's to be a AAA guy or a Sox 2015 roster spot.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from ctredsoxfanhugh. Show ctredsoxfanhugh's posts

    Re: 8/7/2014 Mookie sent down---again

    In response to georom4's comment:

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:

    By that logic 1/2 the teams in the league should just sit their starters and call up the triple A team. 




    any team that gives away 1/3 of their team and 4/5 of their starters has already made this decision



    According to who??? and when has anything like that ever happened?

    Seriously, no run around debate, avoiding the question or moving the goal posts, LEGIT answers.

    When has a team ever benched healthy, legit and established MLB players like Pedroia/Napoli/Ortiz??? 

    is there any precedent for that???? ANY precedent of a team taking established major league players and reducing them all to bench roles???

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from ctredsoxfanhugh. Show ctredsoxfanhugh's posts

    Re: 8/7/2014 Mookie sent down---again

    In response to dannycater's comment:

    I'm with geo...The Sox FO made this mess and you can't really figure out what they are doing...Take Nava for instance. If you look at things lately, he probably should play every day, but if this is about the future, he probably shouldn't play at all. Is he in their plans? Or is Holt their 4th OF next year? What is it? There is ZERO PLAN...They could actually announce a plan and that would also serve notice to the veterans that this is a unique time in Sox history where they need to showcase and play youngsters to make determinations about their immediate future...whether it's to be a AAA guy or a Sox 2015 roster spot.



    Nava has always been a platoon player.  And with Craig/Cespedes/Victorino/Holt in the outfield he is no longer a starter next year.  Even if Victorinos health woes continue Nava is likely not a starter.  

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from ctredsoxfanhugh. Show ctredsoxfanhugh's posts

    Re: 8/7/2014 Mookie sent down---again

    I think it's obvious what the Sox are doing.  I'm not defending it, or saying it's the right decision but I believe it is at least obvious.

    It's simple economics and business.  What do they have??? pitching and prospect pitchers.  What do they lack? power and hitters, particularly in the outfield.

    They traded guys mostly who were not under contract next year and were headed to FA regardless and got back outfielders who can hit (their biggest deficiency) Craig and Cespedes.

    What are they left with?  They still have a built up inventory of ready to near ready MLB pitchers and tons of payroll space.  

    What can they do with this? They can sign a ACE, and they can trade for either another ACE or a big bat. 

    The kids are pitching because they are on display and they are also trying to figure out who might stick in the back of the rotation next year and who they might want to move to the bullpen.  No way, I don't care WHAT people think about management right now, but their is NO way they roll out with Buchholz as the #1 starter, let alone the #2 starter. 

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from ctredsoxfanhugh. Show ctredsoxfanhugh's posts

    Re: 8/7/2014 Mookie sent down---again

    The Sox could hypothetically resign Lester and Miller (both who seem to really like Boston) and be left with a very similiar pitching staff + Craig and Cespedes on the team.

    The only really big difference is Kelly replacing Lackey...and for all we know in 2 years from now Kelly might be a much better pitcher than Lackey. 

    Heck if the Sox really really wanted to, they could resign Lester/Miller and get Scherzer and still be below the luxury tax limit.  And lets be real, the Sox have spent up to or close to the luxury tax limit every year for the past decade.  If that holds true, it is effectively impossible that they DON'T sign big names this winter. 

    And don't hand me the "organizational philosophy stuff" because if you legit believe that then  just look at the long term track record of this team....this team breaks its "philosophy" every other year. 

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSoxKimmi. Show RedSoxKimmi's posts

    Re: 8/7/2014 Mookie sent down---again

    In response to dannycater's comment:

    I'm with geo...The Sox FO made this mess and you can't really figure out what they are doing...Take Nava for instance. If you look at things lately, he probably should play every day, but if this is about the future, he probably shouldn't play at all. Is he in their plans? Or is Holt their 4th OF next year? What is it? There is ZERO PLAN...They could actually announce a plan and that would also serve notice to the veterans that this is a unique time in Sox history where they need to showcase and play youngsters to make determinations about their immediate future...whether it's to be a AAA guy or a Sox 2015 roster spot.




    Even though the Sox need to assess what they have in their young players, there are a couple of things that need to be considered as to why the vets still need to play.

    1.  To keep some integrity to the rest of baseball as far as trying to win games goes.  While the playoff chase might not mean anything to the Sox, it does mean something to the teams competing against the teams we are playing.

    2.  Ownership still needs to keep fans in the seats.  While some fans might think it's more exciting or more beneficial to see the kids play, the casual fans buy tickets to see guys like Papi and Pedroia play.  Those fans would not be happy if they spent a bunch of money to go to the game, then didn't recognize any of the guys who were playing.

     

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from bosoxmal. Show bosoxmal's posts

    Re: 8/7/2014 Mookie sent down---again

    In response to SpacemanEephus' comment:

    All this Betts talk is craaaaaaaazy.  The kid is 21, not ready for prime time, and got a nice couple cups o coffee.  Now its time for him to go get his work in again where he can continue to develop.  I like him too.  i do.  A lot.  I look forward to 2016 when he is a full grown man.  Remember  those 'Future Stars' cards that were in your old Fleer or Topps sets?  Mookie is on one of those now.  he is not competing for a job now, nor in 2015.  Nice to get excited about a kid, but lets not rush him (Xander and Jackie anyone?).  sending him down now is the right thing to do, no question.

     

         



    WHAT? He doesn't play because he's 21 years old? Boy, that's some kind of excuse (or, reasoning). I am not going to waste my time on what is obvious, so you can pull up (real quickly) the names of at least 100 ball players who came to the bigs at age 21 (or below) who made it---and made it big. What nonsense!

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSoxKimmi. Show RedSoxKimmi's posts

    Re: 8/7/2014 Mookie sent down---again

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:

    The Sox could hypothetically resign Lester and Miller (both who seem to really like Boston) and be left with a very similiar pitching staff + Craig and Cespedes on the team.

    The only really big difference is Kelly replacing Lackey...and for all we know in 2 years from now Kelly might be a much better pitcher than Lackey. 

    Heck if the Sox really really wanted to, they could resign Lester/Miller and get Scherzer and still be below the luxury tax limit.  And lets be real, the Sox have spent up to or close to the luxury tax limit every year for the past decade.  If that holds true, it is effectively impossible that they DON'T sign big names this winter. 

    And don't hand me the "organizational philosophy stuff" because if you legit believe that then  just look at the long term track record of this team....this team breaks its "philosophy" every other year. 




    There's no doubt in my mind that the Sox will spend close to the luxury limit next season.  And little doubt in my mind that  they will acquire at least one ace this offseason.

    They have all the resources they need to pretty much whatever they want.  They will also face a roster crunch, and they will have to move some players one way or another.

    The trade for Cespedes makes no sense to me if the FO does not have the intention of contending next year.

     

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from ctredsoxfanhugh. Show ctredsoxfanhugh's posts

    Re: 8/7/2014 Mookie sent down---again

    In response to RedSoxKimmi's comment:

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:

    The Sox could hypothetically resign Lester and Miller (both who seem to really like Boston) and be left with a very similiar pitching staff + Craig and Cespedes on the team.

    The only really big difference is Kelly replacing Lackey...and for all we know in 2 years from now Kelly might be a much better pitcher than Lackey. 

    Heck if the Sox really really wanted to, they could resign Lester/Miller and get Scherzer and still be below the luxury tax limit.  And lets be real, the Sox have spent up to or close to the luxury tax limit every year for the past decade.  If that holds true, it is effectively impossible that they DON'T sign big names this winter. 

    And don't hand me the "organizational philosophy stuff" because if you legit believe that then  just look at the long term track record of this team....this team breaks its "philosophy" every other year. 




    There's no doubt in my mind that the Sox will spend close to the luxury limit next season.  And little doubt in my mind that  they will acquire at least one ace this offseason.

    They have all the resources they need to pretty much whatever they want.  They will also face a roster crunch, and they will have to move some players one way or another.

    The trade for Cespedes makes no sense to me if the FO does not have the intention of contending next year.

     



    Exactly, if you read between the lines it's easy to get an ideal of what the Sox may be trying to do.  Of course none of us are a fly in Ben C's office, but it's not hard to speculate. 

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from bosoxmal. Show bosoxmal's posts

    Re: 8/7/2014 Mookie sent down---again

    In response to BogieAt12oclock's comment:

    As bad as this SOX team is, I'm not sure going to Pawtucket is 'being sent down.'




    Excellent point. The team, overall, is pretty bad; especially now with a depleted pitching staff (Lester threw a 3-hit shut out last night). But, to Mookie, it's still "down", and he must begin to wonder what in the hell he has to do to get a different shot. Jackie B. hasn't had a base hit since July 26. 28 at bats, (including the base hit), he is hitting since then, .036 with ZERO walks and 13 strikeouts.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from BosoxJoe5. Show BosoxJoe5's posts

    Re: 8/7/2014 Mookie sent down---again

    In response to georom4's comment:

    I think the Red Sox coaching and personnel decision makers need to be DFA'd.....they stink and seem only capable of hurting a players development with all their stupid lateral moves and interfering with devlopment of young players....the fact that they have to send them down to AAA to learn something is a sad indictment of the ball washers like farrell...

    As always - 100% correct!

     


    He isn't a infielder anymore and really needs to work on learning his new position. The other option was Bradley. Who would you have sent down between the two?

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from SpacemanEephus. Show SpacemanEephus's posts

    Re: 8/7/2014 Mookie sent down---again

    In response to bosoxmal's comment:

    In response to SpacemanEephus' comment:

    All this Betts talk is craaaaaaaazy.  The kid is 21, not ready for prime time, and got a nice couple cups o coffee.  Now its time for him to go get his work in again where he can continue to develop.  I like him too.  i do.  A lot.  I look forward to 2016 when he is a full grown man.  Remember  those 'Future Stars' cards that were in your old Fleer or Topps sets?  Mookie is on one of those now.  he is not competing for a job now, nor in 2015.  Nice to get excited about a kid, but lets not rush him (Xander and Jackie anyone?).  sending him down now is the right thing to do, no question.

     

         



    WHAT? He doesn't play because he's 21 years old? Boy, that's some kind of excuse (or, reasoning). I am not going to waste my time on what is obvious, so you can pull up (real quickly) the names of at least 100 ball players who came to the bigs at age 21 (or below) who made it---and made it big. What nonsense!




    [object HTMLDivElement]

    OK, I am not going to waste my time on what is obvious either.  But, if one of us were to pull up that magic list, those magic 100 21 year olds would be a pretty select list of the best of the best (or in many cases, early-developers who flashed and faded).  I do not say that one cannot be 21 and be a major league player.

    But, please tell what you have seen in Mookie Betts that says he is show-ready.  I have seen him get a few basehits, for which I was psyched for him.  But certainly nothing that says "this kids gotta stay up!!"

    And, believe it or not, there is actually a reason why you keep kids in the minors: to learn and to grow.  Very hard to do when you are playing above your level when your flaws and holes in your game are so easily exposed.  You really don't see the value of that?

    And, of course, the arbitration clock.  Its one thing to be an arm-chair GM and say, aww why not keep the kid up?  But, if he doesn't really have a role in the 2015 big club plans, you are certainly not going to chip into his 'arby clock' time just so he can play big leaguer in a meaningless end of the season.

    You are misconstruing my meaning and misquoting me if you say I said "he doesnt play because he is 21 years old."  The key words in my statement are not the numerical age part, but the "he's not ready" part.  If he was Mike Trout, yeah, lets get him in the lineup.  But, I don't see Mike Trout, do you?

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from BogieAt12oclock. Show BogieAt12oclock's posts

    Re: 8/7/2014 Mookie sent down---again

    In response to SpacemanEephus' comment:

    In response to bosoxmal's comment:

    In response to SpacemanEephus' comment:

    All this Betts talk is craaaaaaaazy.  The kid is 21, not ready for prime time, and got a nice couple cups o coffee.  Now its time for him to go get his work in again where he can continue to develop.  I like him too.  i do.  A lot.  I look forward to 2016 when he is a full grown man.  Remember  those 'Future Stars' cards that were in your old Fleer or Topps sets?  Mookie is on one of those now.  he is not competing for a job now, nor in 2015.  Nice to get excited about a kid, but lets not rush him (Xander and Jackie anyone?).  sending him down now is the right thing to do, no question.

     

         



    WHAT? He doesn't play because he's 21 years old? Boy, that's some kind of excuse (or, reasoning). I am not going to waste my time on what is obvious, so you can pull up (real quickly) the names of at least 100 ball players who came to the bigs at age 21 (or below) who made it---and made it big. What nonsense!




    [object HTMLDivElement]

    OK, I am not going to waste my time on what is obvious either.  But, if one of us were to pull up that magic list, those magic 100 21 year olds would be a pretty select list of the best of the best (or in many cases, early-developers who flashed and faded).  I do not say that one cannot be 21 and be a major league player.

    But, please tell what you have seen in Mookie Betts that says he is show-ready.  I have seen him get a few basehits, for which I was psyched for him.  But certainly nothing that says "this kids gotta stay up!!"

    And, believe it or not, there is actually a reason why you keep kids in the minors: to learn and to grow.  Very hard to do when you are playing above your level when your flaws and holes in your game are so easily exposed.  You really don't see the value of that?

    And, of course, the arbitration clock.  Its one thing to be an arm-chair GM and say, aww why not keep the kid up?  But, if he doesn't really have a role in the 2015 big club plans, you are certainly not going to chip into his 'arby clock' time just so he can play big leaguer in a meaningless end of the season.

    You are misconstruing my meaning and misquoting me if you say I said "he doesnt play because he is 21 years old."  The key words in my statement are not the numerical age part, but the "he's not ready" part.  If he was Mike Trout, yeah, lets get him in the lineup.  But, I don't see Mike Trout, do you?



    He's more like Mike Carp.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from NLU75. Show NLU75's posts

    Re: 8/7/2014 Mookie sent down---again

    In response to SpacemanEephus' comment:

    All this Betts talk is craaaaaaaazy.  The kid is 21, not ready for prime time, and got a nice couple cups o coffee.  Now its time for him to go get his work in again where he can continue to develop.  I like him too.  i do.  A lot.  I look forward to 2016 when he is a full grown man.  Remember  those 'Future Stars' cards that were in your old Fleer or Topps sets?  Mookie is on one of those now.  he is not competing for a job now, nor in 2015.  Nice to get excited about a kid, but lets not rush him (Xander and Jackie anyone?).  sending him down now is the right thing to do, no question.

     

         




     
  21. This post has been removed.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxdirtdog. Show redsoxdirtdog's posts

    Re: 8/7/2014 Mookie sent down---again

    Giving JBJ a chance to show if he can break iut of this would make sense if he were getting the proper instruction.

    HE'S completely lost at the plate, and cementing bad habits!!!!

    Time to send him down, build up his stats.  Get some good hitting instruction, then give it a slow go next season teamed with Betts.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from ctredsoxfanhugh. Show ctredsoxfanhugh's posts

    Re: 8/7/2014 Mookie sent down---again

    I'll bet Betts is traded this off season.  He will be the major piece in a deal for a top of the rotation starter or a corner slugging outfielder. 

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share