Betts needs to play some 2B

  1. 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]

    There was ZERO PLAN in the trades and dumping of the Sox '13 Rotation...It was a Firesale, Garage Sale with bodies all over the lawn....Peavy, Lackey, Lester, and throw in needlessly Miller too...Doubront I can understand.

    [/QUOTE]
    Just because you don't agree with the rationale, it doesn't mean there wasn't a plan. Peavy was traded because he was mediocre at best. So if that's the case and you have pitching prospects you think are ready, you trade them.

    Lester was traded because of the issue of his contract. Sox wanted something for him and needed outfielder power. So they traded him for Cespedes, rather than lose him for nothing as a FA.

    Lackey the same thing. The Sox have an abundance of pitching prospects and Cherington felt in this offseason, getting a veteran pitcher would be easier than getting a bat. Just because you don't agree, it doesn't mean there was rational reasoning behind what they did.

     

     

     

     
  2. 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]

    Not that it matters, but Yaz moved to LF in the 75 Playoffs after Rice's broken hand....played there in the postseason was outstanding there especially v. Oakland.

    [/QUOTE]
    To add, Yaz played just LF in the ALCS and first three games of the W.S. then played played just 1B in three of the last four games of the W.S. and played LF and 1B in the Game 6.

     

     

     
  3. 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]

    But that's what people, including you I believe, didn't think was worth doing--playing Betts some games at 2b. I just would like to see what he does over there. Maybe Pedroia has a potential guy to challenge him in the future, maybe Betts is pedestrian defender there. But instead of people anointing him as the next CF, I think Betts deserves an opportunity to use these meaningless exhibition (real) games to see what he could do at 2b. I'm not sure that I have any idea what kind of defender he would be at 2b. I've never seen him play there. 

    [/QUOTE]

    You're not sure what kind of defender he'd be at 2B because you didn't watch him play in the minors. I think the Sox know what kind of a defender he'd be. You're obsession with him playing 2B is beyond belief. If the Sox feel Betts could be in the picture next year, they need to simply find him at bats. Sitting Pedroia twice a week as Geo suggested his ridiculous.

    Name one team who sat a veteran in his prime -- top six at his position -- that much just so a rookie can play. It just isn't done.And what words are you trying to put in my mouth. I said it's fine if Betts plays a few games at 2B -- maybe a half dozen tops. It goes back that the Sox have issues at other positions, not 2B, so if you think Betts can help the offense next year, it's to help at one of those positions.What team when they have questions at three positions -- 3B, SS and CF -- creates an issue at a fourth position that is manned by a player who in an off year remains the best defensive player at his position and top six overall.

     

     

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

    Re: Betts needs to play some 2B

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

    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.

    [/QUOTE]


    The underlying message of the proposal was to move Pedroia.   The Sox have a lot of work to do, but this isn't the most likely or smartest path.

     

    It looksd to me like the ?Sox have plenty of room for both Betts and Pedroia.  They will be making some trades, I imagine, but I think newcomers like Edwin Escobar (who will have no options left) and possibly even Yoenis Cespedes (whose acquisition appeared to inspire the Reds to put Latos on the market) are more likely to be potential trade bait.

     

    The Sox aren't going into a youth movement.  At the trading deadline, two of their biggest acquisitions were 20 and 30 years old.  Why would these moves make you think the team needs to get younger at 2B?

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

    Re: Betts needs to play some 2B

    Underlying response to asking if Mookie could get a few reps at 2b in meaningless games is how dare anyone suggest Pedroia is anything but the team's untouchable player...Forsome reason, none of the SP were untouchable. If Mookie is a natural 2b, then it appears he will have to be playing that position somewhere else. I think most scouts would like to see a player perform at the MLB level on defense before making judgment calls. However, Mookie's future is not going to be his natural position in Boston. Not with Pedroia here.

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

    Re: Betts needs to play some 2B

    In response to notin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

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

    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.

    [/QUOTE]


    The underlying message of the proposal was to move Pedroia.   The Sox have a lot of work to do, but this isn't the most likely or smartest path.

     

    It looksd to me like the ?Sox have plenty of room for both Betts and Pedroia.  They will be making some trades, I imagine, but I think newcomers like Edwin Escobar (who will have no options left) and possibly even Yoenis Cespedes (whose acquisition appeared to inspire the Reds to put Latos on the market) are more likely to be potential trade bait.

     

    The Sox aren't going into a youth movement.  At the trading deadline, two of their biggest acquisitions were 20 and 30 years old.  Why would these moves make you think the team needs to get younger at 2B?

    [/QUOTE]

    notin, there was a factoid that said that the Sox '14 roster after the final FireSale was at an average age of 28 or 3 years younger than the '13 WS champions....that's a youth movement, no?

     
  7. 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]

    Underlying response to asking if Mookie could get a few reps at 2b in meaningless games is how dare anyone suggest Pedroia is anything but the team's untouchable player...Forsome reason, none of the SP were untouchable. If Mookie is a natural 2b, then it appears he will have to be playing that position somewhere else. I think most scouts would like to see a player perform at the MLB level on defense before making judgment calls. However, Mookie's future is not going to be his natural position in Boston. Not with Pedroia here.

    [/QUOTE]


    The flip side of that argument is why is Mookie so important that he can't switch positions, if he's blocked at 2b?

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

    Re: Betts needs to play some 2B

    In response to ThefourBs' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to dannycater's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Underlying response to asking if Mookie could get a few reps at 2b in meaningless games is how dare anyone suggest Pedroia is anything but the team's untouchable player...Forsome reason, none of the SP were untouchable. If Mookie is a natural 2b, then it appears he will have to be playing that position somewhere else. I think most scouts would like to see a player perform at the MLB level on defense before making judgment calls. However, Mookie's future is not going to be his natural position in Boston. Not with Pedroia here.

    [/QUOTE]


    The flip side of that argument is why is Mookie so important that he can't switch positions, if he's blocked at 2b?

    [/QUOTE]

    Mookie is trade bait for a major star....maximize his value by showcasing him at his best position - not some new one....Pedroia could use a few more games off as he ages - it will help preserve him (and Im betting that next year, coaching will do this frequently to keep him fresher)

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

    Re: Betts needs to play some 2B

    4Bs, then why is Holt in CF? See, the Sox have ZERO PLAN...They can't figure out what to do and the reality is that how do you expect Middlebrooks, Nava, Betts in particular (Holt plays too much as does JBJr) to find consistency? If Nava isn't in their plans, then why is he even playing? I go back to the idea that we are playing meaningless games in a MLB season, it doesn't happen that often ('12 last few months) and you should have some plan to this madness...right now, it's Farrell and a dart board...Too many toys, just like Jimy W, got to play all the toys...well, you don't really have to play all the toys. 

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

    Re: Betts needs to play some 2B

    The team needs a Plan..not 9 from Outer Space.

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

    Re: Betts needs to play some 2B

    In response to dannycater's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Not that it matters, but Yaz moved to LF in the 75 Playoffs after Rice's broken hand....played there in the postseason was outstanding there especially v. Oakland.

    [/QUOTE]


    [object HTMLDivElement]

    Yaz was a better OF than Rice in 75.  Rice was a stiff out there.  They also had carbo in LF.  Yaz was a better defender than Carbo in LF as well.

    Yaz was a team-first guy.  he let other players develop without fear 

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

    Re: Betts needs to play some 2B

    Yaz was the best, no one played the Monster like a fiddle the way he did. I used to love his fake, then turn to take the bounce to goad the runner into racing into 2nd only to find a tag waiting for him.

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

    Re: Betts needs to play some 2B

    Rice became a better LF over time and learned the Monster well, Greenwell also got better with time. There was one outfielder from a visiting team who was fantastic with the Monster--David Justice. He seemed to get it in the few games he played as a road player.

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

    Re: Betts needs to play some 2B

    In response to SonicsMonksLyresVicars' comment:
    [QUOTE]

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

    In response to SonicsMonksLyresVicars' comment:
    [QUOTE]

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

    I knew some dimwit would bring up Loretta. 

    Defense.  It is still important.

    [/QUOTE]


    "Dimwit"?  Asinine suggestion, total confusion about Yaz' career, inability to deliver an analogous situation yet refusal yield an inch.  Pot/kettle? 

    [/QUOTE]


    [object HTMLDivElement]

     

    You have a unique ability to not stay on subject - you must be great in staff meetings.

    Yaz was the best LF on the Sox roster in 1975.  Rice couldn't get out of his own way out there and carbo was a back up.  I only brought up Yaz because somebody was playing the "I've been a fan since Jim Lonborg" - and it is tiresome when somebody plays that card.  So I pointed out that even Yaz - a HoF OF didn't play a162 in LF every year.  Sometimes younger players got the chance.  And that's where you jumped in because you are a buffoon. 

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Wrong again.  Quelle surprise!

    1)  Yaz played 8 (eight) games in LF for the Red Sox in 1975, Mr. Baseball.

    2)  You first mentioned Yaz on this thread after I wrote that your OP was idiotic, unprecedented...that no team would do such a thing (i.e. drop a star player "a couple of games a week") and challenged you to give an example.  And your example was Yaz in '75, so I pointed out that Yaz effectively stopped being a full time OF in 1969.  Poor you.  I imagine you weren't very smart before...nowadays...

    [/QUOTE]


    [object HTMLDivElement]

     

    Who won the Gold Glove for LF in 1977, genius?  Carl Yastrzemski.

    Did you know that?  I guess not. 

    So who was the superior OF in 1975?  Yaz.

    And yet the Red Sox did not play Yaz in LF in 1975 - they played Rice and Carbo our there (mostly rice who could not field at all).

    This line of argument (About Yaz) which you are attempting to make a "gotcha moment" actually works against you because if they had handled Yaz like you insist they handle Pedroia - Yaz would have played LF every game every year his whole career because he had "earned it as a veteran"

    LOOK at 1977.  Gold Glove award for Yaz.  he was clearly the best LF - but he was willing to subjugate personal for team.  Not just a few games - many games.

    He could have said in 1972 thru 1976 - under no circumstances will I sit out even one game a week in LF; But Yaz didn't do that - he was a team guy.

    LOOK at 1971.  Yaz at age 31 (same age as Pedroia) won the Gold Glove in the OF.  The VERY NEXT year yaz played 83 games in OF.  Why?  Did he suddenly stink?  No.  He won the GG in 1977, genius.

    Yaz did what was best for the team.  Always.

    So yes, he is an excellent example of a star who set aside his personal desires for the good of the team.  I'm glad you are harping over Yaz because the facts support me and make you an idiot.

    Yaz - the legitimate heart and soul guy - had no problem doing what was best for the team.

    Yet, many here suggest that asking Pedroia to let Betts play some 2B is Outrageous (it isn't), unprecedented (it's not) and unfair (wrong).

    So you have no clue on Yaz.  thanks for begging for a smack-down.

     

     

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

    Re: Betts needs to play some 2B

    Sometimes you can tell the age of a poster by when they post stats to show they are wicked smaht but don't know the story or the story behind the story because they weren't around when it was happening. I can admire Ted Williams and admire Babe Ruth and I read the history and ate up the books, but I wasn't there when they were playing. I was with Yaz and Rice and Lynn and I saw them and that's why when I say Manny is the greatest right-handed hitter I've ever seen in person--it's because I never saw Willie Mays or Dimaggio or Foxx or Hornsby in person..or on TV.

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

    Re: Betts needs to play some 2B

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

    In response to SonicsMonksLyresVicars' comment:
    [QUOTE]

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

    In response to SonicsMonksLyresVicars' comment:
    [QUOTE]

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

    I knew some dimwit would bring up Loretta. 

    Defense.  It is still important.

    [/QUOTE]


    "Dimwit"?  Asinine suggestion, total confusion about Yaz' career, inability to deliver an analogous situation yet refusal yield an inch.  Pot/kettle? 

    [/QUOTE]


    [object HTMLDivElement]

     

    You have a unique ability to not stay on subject - you must be great in staff meetings.

    Yaz was the best LF on the Sox roster in 1975.  Rice couldn't get out of his own way out there and carbo was a back up.  I only brought up Yaz because somebody was playing the "I've been a fan since Jim Lonborg" - and it is tiresome when somebody plays that card.  So I pointed out that even Yaz - a HoF OF didn't play a162 in LF every year.  Sometimes younger players got the chance.  And that's where you jumped in because you are a buffoon. 

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Wrong again.  Quelle surprise!

    1)  Yaz played 8 (eight) games in LF for the Red Sox in 1975, Mr. Baseball.

    2)  You first mentioned Yaz on this thread after I wrote that your OP was idiotic, unprecedented...that no team would do such a thing (i.e. drop a star player "a couple of games a week") and challenged you to give an example.  And your example was Yaz in '75, so I pointed out that Yaz effectively stopped being a full time OF in 1969.  Poor you.  I imagine you weren't very smart before...nowadays...

    [/QUOTE]


    [object HTMLDivElement]

     

    Who won the Gold Glove for LF in 1977, genius?  Carl Yastrzemski.

    Did you know that?  I guess not. 

    So who was the superior OF in 1975?  Yaz.

    And yet the Red Sox did not play Yaz in LF in 1975 - they played Rice and Carbo our there (mostly rice who could not field at all).

    This line of argument (About Yaz) which you are attempting to make a "gotcha moment" actually works against you because if they had handled Yaz like you insist they handle Pedroia - Yaz would have played LF every game every year his whole career because he had "earned it as a veteran"

    LOOK at 1977.  Gold Glove award for Yaz.  he was clearly the best LF - but he was willing to subjugate personal for team.  Not just a few games - many games.

    He could have said in 1972 thru 1976 - under no circumstances will I sit out even one game a week in LF; But Yaz didn't do that - he was a team guy.

    LOOK at 1971.  Yaz at age 31 (same age as Pedroia) won the Gold Glove in the OF.  The VERY NEXT year yaz played 83 games in OF.  Why?  Did he suddenly stink?  No.  He won the GG in 1977, genius.

    Yaz did what was best for the team.  Always.

    So yes, he is an excellent example of a star who set aside his personal desires for the good of the team.  I'm glad you are harping over Yaz because the facts support me and make you an idiot.

    Yaz - the legitimate heart and soul guy - had no problem doing what was best for the team.

    Yet, many here suggest that asking Pedroia to let Betts play some 2B is Outrageous (it isn't), unprecedented (it's not) and unfair (wrong).

    So you have no clue on Yaz.  thanks for begging for a smack-down.

    [/QUOTE]

    The Yaz comparison with Pedrioa is absolutely idiotic because you're ignoring one big fact. When Yaz didn't play LF, he played 1B. The key part being -- he played another position. Pedroia is a second baseman. You're not sending him to another position. You're sending him to the bench.

    And Yaz moved to 1B not to give some rookie some playing time at that position. He moved to 1B because the Sox had extra OF'ers and the Sox needed a 1B.

    First time that happened, for instance, was in 1971. He didn't move to 1B so Billy Conigliaro could play LF. He played 1B because Scott moved to 3B and the Sox needed a 1B and had Billy C. to play 1B.

    In 1975, Rice was better than you're giving him credit for. A guy who's "can't get out of his own way" doesn't play 90 games at a position w/o an error. Rice wasn't Yaz out there, but he was a better fielder than you care to admit.

     

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

    Re: Betts needs to play some 2B

    Rice became a better fielder.  But in 1977 he was a DH because his fielding was so atrocious.  I remember.

    Defense.  It is still important.

     
  18. 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 Yaz comparison with Pedrioa is absolutely idiotic because you're ignoring one big fact. When Yaz didn't play LF, he played 1B. The key part being -- he played another position. Pedroia is a second baseman. You're not sending him to another position. You're sending him to the bench.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    [object HTMLDivElement]

    So funny!

    So you'd be on board with pedroia playing LF or 3B or SS in order to get Betts innings at 2B?  No.  You wouldn't.  It's just another diversion.

    I mentioned letting Pedroia DH and then I was told that Ortiz has to be in 162 games at that position.

    The Yaz comparison is good - because it shows clearly a GOLD GLOVE LF being moved to make room.  No whining from Yaz. 

    Many would have NEVER supported that move because Yaz, as a star veteran, never gets moved for a youngster; just like Pedroia can never give up a single inning - not a single AB to Betts - or we will have a crisis

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

    Re: Betts needs to play some 2B

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

    In response to royf19's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    The Yaz comparison with Pedrioa is absolutely idiotic because you're ignoring one big fact. When Yaz didn't play LF, he played 1B. The key part being -- he played another position. Pedroia is a second baseman. You're not sending him to another position. You're sending him to the bench.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    [object HTMLDivElement]

    So funny!

    So you'd be on board with pedroia playing LF or 3B or SS in order to get Betts innings at 2B?  No.  You wouldn't.  It's just another diversion.

    I mentioned letting Pedroia DH and then I was told that Ortiz has to be in 162 games at that position.

    The Yaz comparison is good - because it shows clearly a GOLD GLOVE LF being moved to make room.  No whining from Yaz. 

    Many would have NEVER supported that move because Yaz, as a star veteran, never gets moved for a youngster; just like Pedroia can never give up a single inning - not a single AB to Betts - or we will have a crisis

    [/QUOTE]
    (Bold item No. 1). Now look who's a liar. Who said Ortiz has to play 162 games? But it's silly to sit Ortiz just so Pedoria can DH just so Betts can play second base. Despite the fact that the Sox are out of it, I still expect them to at least try to be competitive so it's stupid to sit Ortiz unless he needs a day off.

    (Bold item No. 1). Clear sign of desperation when you ignore what is written and make false exagerated claims.

    As for Yaz, AGAIN -- maybe it will eventually sink in. YAZ WAS NEVER MOVED TO MAKE ROOM FOR A YOUNG PLAYER. HE WAS MOVED FROM LF TO FILL A NEED AT ANOTHER POSITION AND THE SOX MOVED A YOUNG PLAYER TO FILL IN THAT SPOT.

    What hole is Pedroia moving to???????????????? See the difference. Tell me you're not so obtuse that you can't see the difference in the two situations.

    In 1971, the Sox didn't say, "Gee, let's move Yaz to 1B because we need Billy C to play LF." No. The Sox had a hole at 3B, moved George Scott back to 3rd, creating the whole at 1B. Because Yaz could move and they had Billy C., they moved Yaz to 1B.

    You're starting from the other direction. Mookie Betts, God's give to baseball, HAS TO PLAY 2B. He can't play anywhere else. God forbid, an unproven rookie who hasn't earned anything has to change positon. No, Mookie HAS TO PLAY 2B, So let's put Betts at 2B and Pedroia is moved -- well, there is no hole to fill (like in the Yaz example) so he can take a seat on the bench.

    AGAIN SEE THE DIFFERENCE?

     

     

     

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

    Re: Betts needs to play some 2B

    In response to royf19's comment:
    [QUOTE]

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

    In response to royf19's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    The Yaz comparison with Pedrioa is absolutely idiotic because you're ignoring one big fact. When Yaz didn't play LF, he played 1B. The key part being -- he played another position. Pedroia is a second baseman. You're not sending him to another position. You're sending him to the bench.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    [object HTMLDivElement]

    So funny!

    So you'd be on board with pedroia playing LF or 3B or SS in order to get Betts innings at 2B?  No.  You wouldn't.  It's just another diversion.

    I mentioned letting Pedroia DH and then I was told that Ortiz has to be in 162 games at that position.

    The Yaz comparison is good - because it shows clearly a GOLD GLOVE LF being moved to make room.  No whining from Yaz. 

    Many would have NEVER supported that move because Yaz, as a star veteran, never gets moved for a youngster; just like Pedroia can never give up a single inning - not a single AB to Betts - or we will have a crisis

    [/QUOTE]
    (Bold item No. 1). Now look who's a liar. Who said Ortiz has to play 162 games? But it's silly to sit Ortiz just so Pedoria can DH just so Betts can play second base. Despite the fact that the Sox are out of it, I still expect them to at least try to be competitive so it's stupid to sit Ortiz unless he needs a day off.

    (Bold item No. 1). Clear sign of desperation when you ignore what is written and make false exagerated claims.

    As for Yaz, AGAIN -- maybe it will eventually sink in. YAZ WAS NEVER MOVED TO MAKE ROOM FOR A YOUNG PLAYER. HE WAS MOVED FROM LF TO FILL A NEED AT ANOTHER POSITION AND THE SOX MOVED A YOUNG PLAYER TO FILL IN THAT SPOT.

    What hole is Pedroia moving to???????????????? See the difference. Tell me you're not so obtuse that you can't see the difference in the two situations.

    In 1971, the Sox didn't say, "Gee, let's move Yaz to 1B because we need Billy C to play LF." No. The Sox had a hole at 3B, moved George Scott back to 3rd, creating the whole at 1B. Because Yaz could move and they had Billy C., they moved Yaz to 1B.

    You're starting from the other direction. Mookie Betts, God's give to baseball, HAS TO PLAY 2B. He can't play anywhere else. God forbid, an unproven rookie who hasn't earned anything has to change positon. No, Mookie HAS TO PLAY 2B, So let's put Betts at 2B and Pedroia is moved -- well, there is no hole to fill (like in the Yaz example) so he can take a seat on the bench.

    AGAIN SEE THE DIFFERENCE?

     

     Roy - you protest a bit much here.....no one is planning on removing Pedroia - we just want to see what betts can do at his own position...in case you haven't noticed there is a rookie movement going on and they are playing everywhere...

     

     

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

    Re: Betts needs to play some 2B

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

    Rice became a better fielder.  But in 1977 he was a DH because his fielding was so atrocious.  I remember.

    Defense.  It is still important.

    [/QUOTE]
    No. In 1977, he was the DH because the Sox acquired George Scott, who was a 6-time Gold Glove winner and a better 1B than Yaz. Yaz at that time was a 6-time Gold Glove winner and was a better LF than Rice. It had less to do with Rice's ability in left and more to do with how Scott and Yaz played their positions. It was putting the best player at the respective position.

     

     

     

     
  22. 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]

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

    Rice became a better fielder.  But in 1977 he was a DH because his fielding was so atrocious.  I remember.

    Defense.  It is still important.

    [/QUOTE]
    No. In 1977, he was the DH because the Sox acquired George Scott, who was a 6-time Gold Glove winner and a better 1B than Yaz. Yaz at that time was a 6-time Gold Glove winner and was a better LF than Rice. It had less to do with Rice's ability in left and more to do with how Scott and Yaz played their positions. It was putting the best player at the respective position.

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    that is correct. Boomah was 1b, Yaz LF...best fielders for the available positions

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

    Re: Betts needs to play some 2B

    In response to georom4's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to royf19's comment:
    [QUOTE]

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

    In response to royf19's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    The Yaz comparison with Pedrioa is absolutely idiotic because you're ignoring one big fact. When Yaz didn't play LF, he played 1B. The key part being -- he played another position. Pedroia is a second baseman. You're not sending him to another position. You're sending him to the bench.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    [object HTMLDivElement]

    So funny!

    So you'd be on board with pedroia playing LF or 3B or SS in order to get Betts innings at 2B?  No.  You wouldn't.  It's just another diversion.

    I mentioned letting Pedroia DH and then I was told that Ortiz has to be in 162 games at that position.

    The Yaz comparison is good - because it shows clearly a GOLD GLOVE LF being moved to make room.  No whining from Yaz. 

    Many would have NEVER supported that move because Yaz, as a star veteran, never gets moved for a youngster; just like Pedroia can never give up a single inning - not a single AB to Betts - or we will have a crisis

    [/QUOTE]
    (Bold item No. 1). Now look who's a liar. Who said Ortiz has to play 162 games? But it's silly to sit Ortiz just so Pedoria can DH just so Betts can play second base. Despite the fact that the Sox are out of it, I still expect them to at least try to be competitive so it's stupid to sit Ortiz unless he needs a day off.

    (Bold item No. 1). Clear sign of desperation when you ignore what is written and make false exagerated claims.

    As for Yaz, AGAIN -- maybe it will eventually sink in. YAZ WAS NEVER MOVED TO MAKE ROOM FOR A YOUNG PLAYER. HE WAS MOVED FROM LF TO FILL A NEED AT ANOTHER POSITION AND THE SOX MOVED A YOUNG PLAYER TO FILL IN THAT SPOT.

    What hole is Pedroia moving to???????????????? See the difference. Tell me you're not so obtuse that you can't see the difference in the two situations.

    In 1971, the Sox didn't say, "Gee, let's move Yaz to 1B because we need Billy C to play LF." No. The Sox had a hole at 3B, moved George Scott back to 3rd, creating the whole at 1B. Because Yaz could move and they had Billy C., they moved Yaz to 1B.

    You're starting from the other direction. Mookie Betts, God's give to baseball, HAS TO PLAY 2B. He can't play anywhere else. God forbid, an unproven rookie who hasn't earned anything has to change positon. No, Mookie HAS TO PLAY 2B, So let's put Betts at 2B and Pedroia is moved -- well, there is no hole to fill (like in the Yaz example) so he can take a seat on the bench.

    AGAIN SEE THE DIFFERENCE?

      Roy - you protest a bit much here.....no one is planning on removing Pedroia - we just want to see what betts can do at his own position...in case you haven't noticed there is a rookie movement going on and they are playing everywhere...

     [/QUOTE]
    What's you're point?

    My post was about an absolutely absurd comparison that I think you're smart enough to see. I've posted many times that I had no problem give Betts a handful of games at 2B, but it was more to give Pedroia a day off, but it seems that some posters would rather distort my view.

    The Sox already know what Betts can do at 2B. If they think he could be part of next year's team, they need to find him at-bats to see if he can hit at the major league level and it doesn't matter where those at-bats come from. This hyper need to have those at-bats come at 2B is ridiculous. He just need at-bats from anywhere.

    They already know what kind of fielder he is.

    And that rookie movement might have reached it's limit of 3B, CF and SS and pitching considering the Sox got veterans for Lester and Lackey. So it's not likely they'd create another positon to put a rookie in.

    And since you admit that no one is planning on removing Pedroia, if Betts can be part of the solution next year, wouldn't it make more sense to put him at the positon he'd be able to help out next year.

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

    Re: Betts needs to play some 2B

    But what if Mookie was sensational at 2b defensively, what if he is? How will we ever know for sure without seeing him in a few MLB games at 2b?....The consensus here means nothing. The Sox FO will not allow Betts to play 2b. Pedroia's spot for years to come. I think ultimately Betts should play 2nd at Pawtucket for a whole season. Then let's revisit the thread and see if Pedroia's production gets better, gets worse or he is breaking down while Betts is getting better offensively...But even then, they won't let Betts get a shot at 2b. 

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

    Re: Betts needs to play some 2B

    In response to dannycater's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    But what if Mookie was sensational at 2b defensively, what if he is? How will we ever know for sure without seeing him in a few MLB games at 2b?....The consensus here means nothing. The Sox FO will not allow Betts to play 2b. Pedroia's spot for years to come. I think ultimately Betts should play 2nd at Pawtucket for a whole season. Then let's revisit the thread and see if Pedroia's production gets better, gets worse or he is breaking down while Betts is getting better offensively...But even then, they won't let Betts get a shot at 2b. 

    [/QUOTE]


    [object HTMLDivElement]

    We aren't allowed to find that out.  It would be too psychically damaging to the psyche of fans to see someone else play 2B.

    Emotion-driven fans will never allow St. Dustin to be removed from 2B for any reason - not for one game; not for one inning; not for one AB.

    Yaz?  Of course Yaz could give up his Gold Glove performance in LF.  They will wax poetic about the justice of Yaz a Gold Glove OF being taken out of the OF for FIVE seasons so an assortment of mediocre OF could play LF.

    But allow Betts to play 2B for a couple games on a last place team??  The horror! 

    Such goofy emotionalism from Roy et al in this thread. 

     

     

     

Share