Betts needs to play some 2B

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

    Re: Betts needs to play some 2B

    In response to dannycater's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I wish I could show all the posts everyone made about Youkilis and him being untouchable....even the GM bought into that. Youks was dismissed so fast when things became apparent, though. And the fans will do the same one day with Pedey, or maybe they won't. People tried hard to make Ortiz expendable as early as last pre-season. They don't need him, they said, turn the DH position into a DH by Committee, they said. Ortiz isn't worth the money. Pedroia though is the UNTOUCHABLE...I'll be calling him that for now on. And what's funny is did Schumps, myself or Geo ever say Pedroia isn't a fantastic defensive player or hasn't been a hard working DirtDog? No...we just said what if Mookie got some reps at 2b during a year that the Sox have given up on...that is all...so go ahead and tell us how important it is for Pedey to play 2b every game the rest of the season....is it that important? Pitchers be damned and rotation be damned...but Pedey? God forbid anyone mention him as a trade chip or anything other than the UNTOUCHABLE.

    [/QUOTE]

    Bett's trade value isn't going to get a big boost from a few reps at 2nd.

    You want him playing so bad? Replace someone who isn't hitting, like Xander or JBJ.

    Sitting someone that's producing is STUPID!

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

    Re: Betts needs to play some 2B

    In response to dannycater's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The next 20 posts will say that Pedroia is now a whipping boy and that we are hating on poor Pedey...come on, grow up, it's a business..that's all MLB is...and the Sox way of doing is business is blowing up rotations.

    [/QUOTE]


    Now, you're just being a idiot... again.

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

    Re: Betts needs to play some 2B

    You enjoy watching Webster and Clay? I don't. I miss Lackey and Lester badly...already.

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

    Re: Betts needs to play some 2B

    Betts playing 2b is a no-no...okay, I get it. He is not allowed to play his natural position. Neither is Holt for that matter, although I have no idea what Brandon's natural position is. 

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

    Re: Betts needs to play some 2B

    In response to dannycater's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    You enjoy watching Webster and Clay? I don't. I miss Lackey and Lester badly...already.

    [/QUOTE]

    I know I'm going to regret continuing this, but,...

    What does that have to do with Betts and Pedroia?

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

    Re: Betts needs to play some 2B

    In response to dannycater's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Betts playing 2b is a no-no...okay, I get it. He is not allowed to play his natural position. Neither is Holt for that matter, although I have no idea what Brandon's natural position is. 

    [/QUOTE]


    What's more valuable, a good second baseman, or a good player at multiple positions?

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

    Re: Betts needs to play some 2B

    Ask Billy Beane what is the most important position in baseball....SP.

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

    Re: Betts needs to play some 2B

    In response to dannycater's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Ask Billy Beane what is the most important position in baseball....SP.

    [/QUOTE]


    Last I knew, Betts wasn't a SP.

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

    Re: Betts needs to play some 2B

    Pedroia not playing 2b for a few games isn't going to kill you, the team, or Pedey...seeing Betts play 2b may give us an idea how good Pedey is, and maybe it will show that another guy can be as athletic, brilliant playing 2b..no way of knowing until you do it...only time you can do this is now...only MLB games that Mookie can play in that it won't affect the Sox one way or the other. 

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

    Re: Betts needs to play some 2B

    In response to Schumpeters-Ghost's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Even Yaz stopped playing LF every day in 1975 - but apparently Pedroia as the "spiritual leader" is not going to yield a single inning to our top prospect.

    Insanity.

    Defense.  It is still important.

    [/QUOTE]


    A terrible, false analogy.  Do you even follow the Red Sox?  Yaz essentially finished as a fulltime LF in 1969. Yaz OF games played:

    • 1970: 69
    • 1971:  146
    • 1972:  83
    • 1973:  14
    • 1974:  63
    • 1975 - 1983:  played more than 94 games in the OF once.

    Not to mention Yaz was 35 in 1975 and they had a better player for all 3 OF positions by that point and he was able to play another position, 1B, well.

    Care to try again to think of a star player moved aside "a couple of games a week"  to showcase a rookie?

    I suppose you've made up your mind that it's a good idea and you will never yield even though there are probably no historical examples.

    But what do paid professionals know?  It's guys on the internet with all the knowledge.

     

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Schumpeters-Ghost. Show Schumpeters-Ghost's posts

    Re: Betts needs to play some 2B

    Bottom Line - the Pedroia-Cult is afraid that Betts will play well at 2B.

    Bizarre that fans would not want to see that.

    Defense.  It is still important.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from sycophant123. Show sycophant123's posts

    Re: Betts needs to play some 2B

    In response to dannycater's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I felt Jon Lester was just as valuable to the Sox as Pedroia...You can argue till the turtle returns home from the lake as to a position player v. a SP, but I'm thoroughly fascinated at how untouchable Pedroia is how it was so easy for fans to dismiss Lester via his trade. Why is Pedroia so protected here? It was just like Youkilis when he should have been dealt. He was slipping offensively and the Sox felt that he should play 3b so that AGON could be signed for a longterm contract. They dismissed the prospect of instead signing ABeltre. Youkilis was a DirtDog and he was untouchable, and then he got hurt and stopped producing, and Middlebrooks showed up. Betts is no Pedroia? You can't make any assessment based on Betts never playing 2b in MLB yet. Pedroia has 42 RBI this year and finally hit his 5th home run last night. All Schumps did in this thread was bring up an idea to allow Mookie play his natural positon, and it's turned into we are dumping on Pedroia thread....all that says is that Sox fans have massive double standards in regard to who their favorites are, and the Sox organization has made it clear that certain players are untouchable and other stars can be dealt at a moment's notice--Lester.

    [/QUOTE]

    You really don't get the role that the contract status played in this?  I am not being sarcastic, just asking. It is really simple, Pedroia signed a long term contract for about 14 million a year, while Lester wanted much more than that. If Pedroia wanted 18 a year he wouldn't be here anymore.

    This isn't confusing, it is about dollar amounts not about "which players are untouchable"

    As far as Betts playing some second base...sure, fine, who cares?

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: Betts needs to play some 2B

    This thread is pathetic.

    We have a player who plays the best defense at that position in the majors, who plays hard all the time, plays hurt, wants to play every day is still productive even if he's having an off year and now there is jibad against him -- that he should hand the job over to an unproven player rookie simply because he doesn't hit as many homers as in the past.

    Ridiculous.

    It's not a matter of being untouchable no matter how some of you want to paint it. It's a matter of a player having earned his position.

    The same group of you who are saying that Pedroia has been handed the positon now simply want to hand the position to a rookie. A bit hypocritical, don't you think.

    The Sox already know what kind of defense Betts can play. The question is can he hit, and the Sox can find places for Betts to play if they think he's ready.

    This attack on Pedroia is ridiculously over the top -- Danny, did he kick your dog or something -- and the Yaz comparison is ridiculous. He moved to 1B because there was a need and he could play that position. How is that at all similar to Pedroia playing second base. There's not position where there's a need to fill that Pedroia would move to.

    The fact is, of all the Sox issues, they don't need a second baseman. If Betts shows he can hit, there are other spots. Let him battle Jackie Bradley, another rookie, for the center field job.

    And the fact that posters have to use phrases like Pedroia Cult shows how weak their argument is. They need to dress up the language simply because they really have no firm stance for their position.

    If Betts can hit good enough, I want him in the lineup with Pedroia because Pedroia still is productive and has the best glove in the majors at his position.

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

    Re: Betts needs to play some 2B

    In response to Schumpeters-Ghost's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Bottom Line - the Pedroia-Cult is afraid that Betts will play well at 2B.

    Bizarre that fans would not want to see that.

    Defense.  It is still important.

    [/QUOTE]


    No, the Bottom Line is that your suggestion is asinine, no team would do it, no team has ever done it, you're too stubborn to admit it's asinine, and your fallback position is to claim that those that disagree with you are a "cult" and "afraid" to do the asinine thing you suggest.

    Excellent analogy re Yaz, Mr. Baseball.

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

    Re: Betts needs to play some 2B

    In response to royf19's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    This thread is pathetic.

    We have a player who plays the best defense at that position in the majors, who plays hard all the time, plays hurt, wants to play every day is still productive even if he's having an off year and now there is jibad against him -- that he should hand the job over to an unproven player rookie simply because he doesn't hit as many homers as in the past.

    Ridiculous.

    It's not a matter of being untouchable no matter how some of you want to paint it. It's a matter of a player having earned his position.

    The same group of you who are saying that Pedroia has been handed the positon now simply want to hand the position to a rookie. A bit hypocritical, don't you think.

    The Sox already know what kind of defense Betts can play. The question is can he hit, and the Sox can find places for Betts to play if they think he's ready.

    This attack on Pedroia is ridiculously over the top -- Danny, did he kick your dog or something -- and the Yaz comparison is ridiculous. He moved to 1B because there was a need and he could play that position. How is that at all similar to Pedroia playing second base. There's not position where there's a need to fill that Pedroia would move to.

    The fact is, of all the Sox issues, they don't need a second baseman. If Betts shows he can hit, there are other spots. Let him battle Jackie Bradley, another rookie, for the center field job.

    And the fact that posters have to use phrases like Pedroia Cult shows how weak their argument is. They need to dress up the language simply because they really have no firm stance for their position.

    If Betts can hit good enough, I want him in the lineup with Pedroia because Pedroia still is productive and has the best glove in the majors at his position.

    [/QUOTE]

    Do not put me in the Yaz argument, I never ever brought up the Hall of Famer's name here and Pedroia is no Yastrzemski nor should be compared to Yaz's situation. But I still do not think it will hurt the pride of Pedroia, his fans, nor destroy The UNTOUCHABLE play a few games at DH, Ortiz at 1b, and Betts at 2b just to see a glimpse of what Mookie has to offer at 2b. I never said he would take his job, I never said I want him replaced, and I never said Pedroia wasn't a Gold Glove keeper (I've often said that his defense is the reason his offense isn't as important). But in a season of loss, I don't see it being an issue to allow Betts to play a little bit at 2b, say 4 or 5 games in a stretch just to see what he has to offer. If he was spectacular as has happened with some young phenoms, then you can either use Mookie as a potential trade guy or you can think about the possibility (oh my god, here comes Pedroia kicking Cater's dog again...) that Pedroia could become one of the best trade possibilities for a SP. How come it's okay to blow up the rotation and pretend it's nothing to rebuild it, and then turn around and say Pedroia is untouchable? Why is that so hard for people to comprehend. The team has to make moves to get the rotation back to being a viable one. People think Lester is returning. I don't see it happening. Dumping the Rotation was so simple for Ben, and I am forced to swallow that. But Pedroia is THE UNTOUCHABLE. I get it, I know it, but it's really amazing how a guy whose hitting has slipped is so important that you can't even let him rest for 5 games to see if Mookie has 2b skills at MLB level or not. It's not that big a deal. It really isn't.

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

    Re: Betts needs to play some 2B

    Who allowed for the contract situation to become dire for Lester and Lackey..the Red Sox FO, that's who. Who said it was so dire to have to trade Peavy, the Sox FO did. Wouldn't Peavy be a good guy to have back in the rotation considering how there is no other guy even close to his ability left in the rotation? Why did Peavy have to be dealt if the Sox knew Lackey and Lester were going to be dealt. Does everyone believe every word that Ben says? I don't. The rotation was blown up because the Sox felt they had no chance to get a Cespedes or Craig in the off season. Maybe so. But if the Rotation is blown up, how hard is it to blow up other things on the team? Does it really matter who plays 2b right now? What does it matter. It's 2 months of wasted Sox baseball anyway. Let the children play now. It may be the only time other than 2012 second half, you can experiment. This is one way of experimenting--letting Mookie play some 2b.

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

    Re: Betts needs to play some 2B

    So that people think I'm not just trashing on poor Dusty, you can have Ortiz sit too so that Cespedes DH, Craig (if he will ever play again...starting to sound like Jason Bay but after he left the Sox, not upon joining the Sox) play LF, Holt in CF, and Nava in RF....Nava is untouchable too for a lot of fans. It's okay, Nava has improved and is starting to return to his '13 form albeit with no power. I get it, SP means nothing, position players are more important, or the opposite philosophy of the '13 SP deep Sox, the one that won the WS title.

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

    Re: Betts needs to play some 2B

    Or Craig at DH, Cespedes LF. Wait till Ortiz gets his 100th RBI, then do that. At least in Ortiz's case, all he does is hit and produce. You know his job. Not 70 percent of his job or 55 percent of his job. 

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: Betts needs to play some 2B

    In response to dannycater's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to royf19's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    This thread is pathetic.

    We have a player who plays the best defense at that position in the majors, who plays hard all the time, plays hurt, wants to play every day is still productive even if he's having an off year and now there is jibad against him -- that he should hand the job over to an unproven player rookie simply because he doesn't hit as many homers as in the past.

    Ridiculous.

    It's not a matter of being untouchable no matter how some of you want to paint it. It's a matter of a player having earned his position.

    The same group of you who are saying that Pedroia has been handed the positon now simply want to hand the position to a rookie. A bit hypocritical, don't you think.

    The Sox already know what kind of defense Betts can play. The question is can he hit, and the Sox can find places for Betts to play if they think he's ready.

    This attack on Pedroia is ridiculously over the top -- Danny, did he kick your dog or something -- and the Yaz comparison is ridiculous. He moved to 1B because there was a need and he could play that position. How is that at all similar to Pedroia playing second base. There's not position where there's a need to fill that Pedroia would move to.

    The fact is, of all the Sox issues, they don't need a second baseman. If Betts shows he can hit, there are other spots. Let him battle Jackie Bradley, another rookie, for the center field job.

    And the fact that posters have to use phrases like Pedroia Cult shows how weak their argument is. They need to dress up the language simply because they really have no firm stance for their position.

    If Betts can hit good enough, I want him in the lineup with Pedroia because Pedroia still is productive and has the best glove in the majors at his position.

    [/QUOTE]

    Do not put me in the Yaz argument, I never ever brought up the Hall of Famer's name here and Pedroia is no Yastrzemski nor should be compared to Yaz's situation. But I still do not think it will hurt the pride of Pedroia, his fans, nor destroy The UNTOUCHABLE play a few games at DH, Ortiz at 1b, and Betts at 2b just to see a glimpse of what Mookie has to offer at 2b. I never said he would take his job, I never said I want him replaced, and I never said Pedroia wasn't a Gold Glove keeper (I've often said that his defense is the reason his offense isn't as important). But in a season of loss, I don't see it being an issue to allow Betts to play a little bit at 2b, say 4 or 5 games in a stretch just to see what he has to offer. If he was spectacular as has happened with some young phenoms, then you can either use Mookie as a potential trade guy or you can think about the possibility (oh my god, here comes Pedroia kicking Cater's dog again...) that Pedroia could become one of the best trade possibilities for a SP. How come it's okay to blow up the rotation and pretend it's nothing to rebuild it, and then turn around and say Pedroia is untouchable? Why is that so hard for people to comprehend. The team has to make moves to get the rotation back to being a viable one. People think Lester is returning. I don't see it happening. Dumping the Rotation was so simple for Ben, and I am forced to swallow that. But Pedroia is THE UNTOUCHABLE. I get it, I know it, but it's really amazing how a guy whose hitting has slipped is so important that you can't even let him rest for 5 games to see if Mookie has 2b skills at MLB level or not. It's not that big a deal. It really isn't.

    [/QUOTE]

    First, why can't you state your case w/o the absolutely stupid term "untouchable." You create a false premise. It has nothing to do with a guy being untouchable. Teams don't simply sit a veteran who still is one of the best at his position even if it is an off year so they can showcase a rookie. It's simply isn't done regardless of whose name it is.

    And as i stated, you gain nothing by putting Betts at second base because the Sox already know what kind of second baseman he is. Unlike offense, defense translates upward. It all comes down whether or not the Sox want to give Betts at-bats to determine if he can hit in the majors, and there are other places to give him at-bats.

    And believe it or not, I have no problem with him playing a couple o games at second base to give Pedroia a rest, but a couple of games worth of at-bats tells you nothing.

    Beyond that, the Sox aren't going to trade Pedroia not because he's untouchable. On one level, it's stupid. the Sox already are trying to stabilize 3B and SS. So now what, you're going to put a rookie in at 2B too. Bogaerts last year looked like he could handle hitting and I still he think will. But there are growing pains, and you don't know what kind of growing pains Betts might go through. 

    On another level about trading Pedey, what's so wrong about IDing a guy you don't want to trade because you want him as one of the faces of the franchise for everything he brings to the table both on the field and in the locker room?Guys who play their entire career with one team is as rare as ever. It's one thing if he was a liability, but Pedroia is hardly that. He ranks sixth among 2B overall (offense and defense), first defensively, sixth BA and RBI, 10th OPS.

    The issue isn't so much letting Betts play a couple of games at second base as much of your tone. Just go back and read your posts and the tone. It borders on hysterics. You come across as portraying Pedroia as some kind of cancer of the team simply because he plays every day and that it's wrong to be a fan of his, and that it's wrong to want him as a stabilizing player among all the changes going on. 

     

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from sycophant123. Show sycophant123's posts

    Re: Betts needs to play some 2B

    The whole post is disingenuous.  He got mad because Lester wasn't signed to a reasonable long term deal and is now mad that Pedroia is signed to a reasonable long term deal.

    And then acts like both situations are exactly the same. There really isn't much point to get sucked into an argument like that.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from MadMc44. Show MadMc44's posts

    Re: Betts needs to play some 2B

    Shum--Betts is a 2 B, so is Holt, so is Pedroia, so is Ryan Roberts @ AAA, so is Sean Coyle @ AA, etc., etc.

    So find a trade partner and trade Betts and get back the second coming. Pedroia is our 2 B, he's the Capt.

    Mookie takes what he can get just like Xander--he wants to be a SS--he belongs in LF.

    Napoli was a catcher now he's a 1 B, Drew wants to be a SS, he's playing 2 B.

    The Sox are trying to find a place for him like they are trying to keep Holt's .300 bat in the lineup---there are options--he is the super sub like Holt was the super sub, like Herrera was the super sub. I don't hear Betts complaining.

    Betts is a good player--he will either make it here or be traded.

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

    Re: Betts needs to play some 2B

    In response to Schumpeters-Ghost's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Bottom Line - the Pedroia-Cult is afraid that Betts will play well at 2B.

    Bizarre that fans would not want to see that.

    Defense.  It is still important.

    [/QUOTE]


    Who's afraid of that?

     

    In fact, I think most fans would expect him to play well there,  Some probably already assume he is the Second Coming of Hornsby, like they did last April.

     

    But if he stays in Boston, it won't be as a 2B, because he isn't needed there.  SS? CF? 3B? All more likely, and why not try him at one of those positions?

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

    Re: Betts needs to play some 2B

    In response to notin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Schumpeters-Ghost's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Bottom Line - the Pedroia-Cult is afraid that Betts will play well at 2B.

    Bizarre that fans would not want to see that.

    Defense.  It is still important.

    [/QUOTE]


    Who's afraid of that?

     

    In fact, I think most fans would expect him to play well there,  Some probably already assume he is the Second Coming of Hornsby, like they did last April.

     

    But if he stays in Boston, it won't be as a 2B, because he isn't needed there.  SS? CF? 3B? All more likely, and why not try him at one of those positions?

    [/QUOTE]

    Evidently, the Ghost thinks that once you are tagged as 2B, 3B, or OF, that's all you can ever be.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Schumpeters-Ghost. Show Schumpeters-Ghost's posts

    Re: Betts needs to play some 2B

    In response to royf19's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    The same group of you who are saying that Pedroia has been handed the positon now simply want to hand the position to a rookie. A bit hypocritical, don't you think.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    [object HTMLDivElement]

     

    I think if you have to lie to make your point, it is you who are pathetic. 

    The proposal was to let Betts play SOME 2B.  Not hand him the job. 

    But fear rules the day - we can't let Dusty DH or sit out a game here and there.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from sycophant123. Show sycophant123's posts

    Re: Betts needs to play some 2B

    There really is no reason that he can't play a little second base here and there. I think the obvious point is he won't have the job there, so why bother?

     

Share