Could ownership be making the call on Iggy?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from attic-dan. Show attic-dan's posts

    Could ownership be making the call on Iggy?

       Their has been much written about Iggy starting season with the big club. This goes against the standard operation procedure of most clubs. Teams routinely keep their top prospects on the farm to June, which allows them in most cases to keep control of player for an extra year before they hit FA. Two of the most recent examples being Strasburg in "10" and Bryce Harper this year with the Nationals. Ben could be taking the bullet for ownership, who seem to becoming cost friendly in recent transactions.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from law2009a. Show law2009a's posts

    Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy?

    m
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bill-806. Show Bill-806's posts

    Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy?

    In Response to Could ownership be making the call on Iggy?:
    [QUOTE]   Their has been much written about Iggy starting season with the big club. This goes against the standard operation procedure of most clubs. Teams routinely keep their top prospects on the farm to June, which allows them in most cases to keep control of player for an extra year before they hit FA. Two of the most recent examples being Strasburg in "10" and Bryce Harper this year with the Nationals. Ben could be taking the bullet for ownership, who seem to becoming cost friendly in recent transactions.
    Posted by attic-dan[/QUOTE]Your right ATTICMAN...... It could come down to that ......  However,  ownership should not forget last years  0-6 , 2-10 start.....  Bobby V.  sees VALUE in  Iggy & Lavarnway.....  The pitchers are going to love Iggy's glove !!!!
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Beantowne. Show Beantowne's posts

    Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy?

    Not sure that his arbitration clock plays as much of a role as how well Aviles has handle himslef this spring...End of the day if Iggy's not the opening day SS and more important, if the Sox are not committed to allowing to start and give him 3 months to once and for all lay claim to the starters job. He's better served to play everyday in AAA.

    FYI the Owner of the team certainly has a voice in this decision. Not just in Boston, but on the other 28 clubs too. With ownership comes privilege...

    My guess is that in this instance, Luccino, Cherington and Valentine will come to a consensus in the best interest of the Boston Red Sox Baseball Club of the American League and Henry will support that consensus. If Inglesias is deemed to be the best SS on the team and his value is to the big club, he'll break camp and head north to boston, if they see value in his taking the bus to Pawtucket, regardless of whether it's a baseball or a longer term financial decision. Then he'll be a quick trip down I-95 to Rhode Island away...
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from law2009a. Show law2009a's posts

    Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy?

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

    Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy?

     Teams routinely keep their top prospects on the farm to June, which allows them in most cases to keep control of player for an extra year before they hit FA. Two of the most recent examples being Strasburg in "10" and Bryce Harper this year with the Nationals.

    I'm not sure that examply is completely relevant.  You're talking about two of the best prospects in the country, where one extra year could be getting a $20M player for $15M in arbitration.  Right now, we're talking about a .501 OPS ST hitter who hit .554 last year in AAA.

    I appreciate saving a little salary, but for me, this is about developing Iggy to be a better hitter over the next 6 years than trying to get an immaterial advantage right now.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy?

    Teams routinely keep their top prospects on the farm to June, which allows them in most cases to keep control of player for an extra year before they hit FA. Two of the most recent examples being Strasburg in "10" and Bryce Harper this year with the Nationals.

    I'm not sure that examply is completely relevant.  You're talking about two of the best prospects in the country, where one extra year could be getting a $20M player for $15M in arbitration.  Right now, we're talking about a .501 OPS ST hitter who hit .554 last year in AAA.

    I appreciate saving a little salary, but for me, this is about developing Iggy to be a better hitter over the next 6 years than trying to get an immaterial advantage right now.

    To me, if management thinks it's a real close call, then I can see them thinking the extra year of "prime" could be the balance tipper; otherwise, they should go with what they feel gives us the best chance to win this year.

    I've made my position know several times. Iggy's fielding and superior range should outweigh the drop in offense, but also having Aviles as the supersub strengthens us at that position as well. With CC on the DL and Youk's health always in question, I like the thought of having Aviles as the main utility player and Puto the secondary one.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy?

    In Response to Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy?:
    [QUOTE]Teams routinely keep their top prospects on the farm to June, which allows them in most cases to keep control of player for an extra year before they hit FA. Two of the most recent examples being Strasburg in "10" and Bryce Harper this year with the Nationals. I'm not sure that examply is completely relevant.  You're talking about two of the best prospects in the country, where one extra year could be getting a $20M player for $15M in arbitration.  Right now, we're talking about a .501 OPS ST hitter who hit .554 last year in AAA. I appreciate saving a little salary, but for me, this is about developing Iggy to be a better hitter over the next 6 years than trying to get an immaterial advantage right now. To me, if management thinks it's a real close call, then I can see them thinking the extra year of "prime" could be the balance tipper; otherwise, they should go with what they feel gives us the best chance to win this year. I've made my position know several times. Iggy's fielding and superior range should outweigh the drop in offense, but also having Aviles as the supersub strengthens us at that position as well. With CC on the DL and Youk's health always in question, I like the thought of having Aviles as the main utility player and Puto the secondary one.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    All good points moon, either way Lav and Iggy are still very young with many great years ahead of them.  Handing over the SS position to Iggy should be a slow transition with Aviles starting so Iggy can watch and learn at the big league level, while maybe playing once a week.  I'm not convinced Iggy starting is worth sacraficing Aviles on offense because Iggy will still make his share of rookie mistakes in the field while hitting less. 

    I feel Lav should have also been given the backup role a catcher for the same reason, to learn more at the major league level.  I'm sure if Kelly and Salty carry their present ST batting averages into the regular season Lav could be here sooner than expected anyway.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from sportsbozo1. Show sportsbozo1's posts

    Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy?

    Iggy is without a doubt in my mind a top flight SS,he has the smoothest transfer of the ball from glove to throwing hand I've ever seen and I've been watching baseball for 50 years. Ozzie was far more erratic than this kid and he couldn't hit a lick either when he first arrived in the bigs,once the Sox finally decide to put him in there and fend for himself he will be just fine.This doesn't diminish the skills and offensive abilities of Mike Aviles because he has the skill too play everyday at the position also,he's just not as fluid as Iggy.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bill-806. Show Bill-806's posts

    Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy?

        "Let me be clear",  only the lib/left/rad/soc/marx/moonbats would keep these future  H O F's  down on the farm !!!!!!  Me thinks that tis is more about the redistribution of $$$$$$ than having the best players on the field !!!!
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Chilliwings. Show Chilliwings's posts

    Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy?

    In Response to Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy?:
    [QUOTE]    "Let me be clear",  only the lib/left/rad/soc/marx/moonbats would keep these future  H O F's  down on the farm !!!!!!  Me thinks that tis is more about the redistribution of $$$$$$ than having the best players on the field !!!!
    Posted by Bill-806[/QUOTE]

    ....do you understand the issue of player control, Bill?
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from attic-dan. Show attic-dan's posts

    Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy?

    In Response to Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy? : ....do you understand the issue of player control, Bill?
    Posted by Chilliwings[/QUOTE]

       My concern is that this is a ploy you expect out of a small market team. While cost has to be factored into any transaction, it appears now to be the overriding consideration, going for the cheapest solution.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy?

    In Response to Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy?:
    Teams routinely keep their top prospects on the farm to June, which allows them in most cases to keep control of player for an extra year before they hit FA. Two of the most recent examples being Strasburg in "10" and Bryce Harper this year with the Nationals. I'm not sure that examply is completely relevant.  You're talking about two of the best prospects in the country, where one extra year could be getting a $20M player for $15M in arbitration.  Right now, we're talking about a .501 OPS ST hitter who hit .554 last year in AAA. I appreciate saving a little salary, but for me, this is about developing Iggy to be a better hitter over the next 6 years than trying to get an immaterial advantage right now. To me, if management thinks it's a real close call, then I can see them thinking the extra year of "prime" could be the balance tipper; otherwise, they should go with what they feel gives us the best chance to win this year. I've made my position know several times. Iggy's fielding and superior range should outweigh the drop in offense, but also having Aviles as the supersub strengthens us at that position as well. With CC on the DL and Youk's health always in question, I like the thought of having Aviles as the main utility player and Puto the secondary one.
    Posted by moonslav59


    All good points moon, either way Lav and Iggy are still very young with many great years ahead of them.  Handing over the SS position to Iggy should be a slow transition with Aviles starting so Iggy can watch and learn at the big league level, while maybe playing once a week.  I'm not convinced Iggy starting is worth sacraficing Aviles on offense because Iggy will still make his share of rookie mistakes in the field while hitting less.  

    I feel Lav should have also been given the backup role a catcher for the same reason, to learn more at the major league level.  I'm sure if Kelly and Salty carry their present ST batting averages into the regular season Lav could be here sooner than expected anyway.
    -craze4sox

    I'm not sure you might have misunderstood what my points were: I never advocated Iggy riding the bench for 6 days a week. I actually have said a while back that if our plan is not to play Iggy, we should trade him. (I wasn't aware that we still had a few years of control after his contract runs out.)

    Iggy as the starter allows us to have a very nice bench in Aviles, Punto, Sweeney and Shoppach (Lava). While having a great defensive SS on the bench (with Aviles starting) would be nice as well, Iggy needs to play everyday. His value on the bench would not outweigh the added prime year we'd by keeping him in AAA until July.

    Since CC will start the season on the DL and Aviles can play OP (esp vs LHPs), I think starting Iggy at SS nearly everyday makes the most sense. When CC comes back, we might have a better feel of how it is working, and decide at that time who plays or goes where.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Chilliwings. Show Chilliwings's posts

    Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy?

    In Response to Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy? :    My concern is that this is a ploy you expect out of a small market team. While cost has to be factored into any transaction, it appears now to be the overriding consideration, going for the cheapest solution.
    Posted by attic-dan[/QUOTE]

    I don't think that's necessarily the case, Dan.  I think a marginal improvement at a position at the cost of a year of control would be a poor decision for any team.  Don't forget that while the big market teams have larger budgets, they still have to make compromises.  Surely you want the Sox to get as much as possible for the money they have to spend?

    The question is are SS & C marginal decisions for April-June 2012?  I think catcher definitely is and Lav should start in Pawtucket.  SS seems to be a closer decision.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bill-806. Show Bill-806's posts

    Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy?

    In Response to Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy? : ....do you understand the issue of player control, Bill?
    Posted by Chilliwings[/QUOTE]Yes, thank you, I do..... And it is driven by $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from law2009a. Show law2009a's posts

    Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy?

    m
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from attic-dan. Show attic-dan's posts

    Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy?

    In Response to Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy? : I don't think that's necessarily the case, Dan.  I think a marginal improvement at a position at the cost of a year of control would be a poor decision for any team.  Don't forget that while the big market teams have larger budgets, they still have to make compromises.  Surely you want the Sox to get as much as possible for the money they have to spend? The question is are SS & C marginal decisions for April-June 2012?  I think catcher definitely is and Lav should start in Pawtucket.  SS seems to be a closer decision.
    Posted by Chilliwings[/QUOTE]

      Last year taught us once again, how much each victory means for a contending team. I agree with your assesment for low budget teams to get extra year, but teams going for it all should make decisions based on the good of the major league ball-club. What really worries me is if this philosophy is in tact at the trade dead-line, with cost holding up needed improvement, but that is a post for a latter day.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bill-806. Show Bill-806's posts

    Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy?

    In Response to Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy? :   Last year taught us once again, how much each victory means for a contending team. I agree with your assesment for low budget teams to get extra year, but teams going for it all should make decisions based on the good of the major league ball-club. What really worries me is if this philosophy is in tact at the trade dead-line, with cost holding up needed improvement, but that is a post for a latter day.
    Posted by attic-dan[/QUOTE]BINGO AtticMan......  Im sure you mean, like 0-6 & 2-10  !!!!
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from 111SoxFan111. Show 111SoxFan111's posts

    Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy?

    In Response to Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy?:
    [QUOTE]    "Let me be clear",  only the lib/left/rad/soc/marx/moonbats would keep these future  H O F's  down on the farm !!!!!!  Me thinks that tis is more about the redistribution of $$$$$$ than having the best players on the field !!!!
    Posted by Bill-806[/QUOTE]
    If anyone has Bill's contact information, please let him know his account has been hacked by Softy.

    FWIW, these discussions are fun but are now getting funny.  I understand the position that we should be starting Iggy and Lava ... I don't necessarily agree (less with Iggy and more with Lava), but I totally understand and appreciate the argument.  However, I can't believe anyone really thinks that it is 100% clear this would be a better team with Iggy and Lava starting on opening day instead of Aviles and Salty and that any other decision is purely based on money or some political struggle between BV and BC.  

    If BV and BC thought this was a clear choice when judged only by the team's chances of winning, there is no way these guys go back to AAA ... it's really that simple.  When the choice is less clear, though, then the year of control and player development issues come into play.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bill-806. Show Bill-806's posts

    Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy?

    In Response to Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy? : If anyone has Bill's contact information, please let him know his account has been hacked by Softy. FWIW, these discussions are fun but are now getting funny.  I understand the position that we should be starting Iggy and Lava ... I don't necessarily agree (less with Iggy and more with Lava), but I totally understand and appreciate the argument.  However, I can't believe anyone really thinks that it is 100% clear this would be a better team with Iggy and Lava starting on opening day instead of Aviles and Salty and that any other decision is purely based on money or some political struggle between BV and BC.   If BV and BC thought this was a clear choice when judged only by the team's chances of winning, there is no way these guys go back to AAA ... it's really that simple.  When the choice is less clear, though, then the year of control and player development issues come into play.
    Posted by 111SoxFan111[/QUOTE] "let me be clear",  1/ Softy AKA Hank, AKA,AKA,AKA has not hacked in to Bill-806.  However, we do share a lot of the same vision that is directly related to the game of baseball.......  2/ If the Sox really want to win and get off to a great start, then Iggy & lavarnway will be in the opening day lineup !!!!!   3/ $$$$$$$$$$  will put the two of them in Pawtucket  with tickets to the re-ride up I-95 !!!!!!!
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Chilliwings. Show Chilliwings's posts

    Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy?

    In Response to Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy? :   Last year taught us once again, how much each victory means for a contending team. I agree with your assesment for low budget teams to get extra year, but teams going for it all should make decisions based on the good of the major league ball-club. What really worries me is if this philosophy is in tact at the trade dead-line, with cost holding up needed improvement, but that is a post for a latter day.
    Posted by attic-dan[/QUOTE]

    Even IF Lav can outperform the Salty/Shop duo defensively (unlikely at the moment) and IF he can out hit them (possible, but with a true platoon they should do ok) and IF you are willing to forgo the extra year of control by bringing Lav north....are you not concerned that Lav has never caught more than 66 games in season....and that was in A ball 3 years ago? 
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bill-806. Show Bill-806's posts

    Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy?

    In Response to Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy? : Even IF Lav can outperform the Salty/Shop duo defensively (unlikely at the moment) and IF he can out hit them (possible, but with a true platoon they should do ok) and IF you are willing to forgo the extra year of control by bringing Lav north....are you not concerned that Lav has never caught more than 66 games in season....and that was in A ball 3 years ago? 
    Posted by Chilliwings[/QUOTE]Chilli..... "Let me be clear",  Carlton Fisk was an unknown till a manager with a gooood baseball eye saw enough to make the leap.......   As dad would say.......  "And with that son, the rest is history" !!!!!!
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from ZILLAGOD. Show ZILLAGOD's posts

    Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy?

    Let me be clear!!!

    I believe Larry Lucchino makes all the major baseball decisions and has since he's been in Boston.

    He doesn't necessarily take credit, but when the decision is a bad one, someone else is to blame...player, coach, manager or GM.

    I have always believed that all baseball decisions pass through his desk before they are finalized, and possibly it is not the wrong thing to do when a man has the title of president....but it will never be his fault when something goes haywire...count on that!

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

    Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy?

    In Response to Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy?:
    [QUOTE]Let me be clear!!! I believe Larry Lucchino makes all the major baseball decisions and has since he's been in Boston. He doesn't necessarily take credit, but when the decision is a bad one, someone else is to blame...player, coach, manager or GM. I have always believed that all baseball decisions pass through his desk before they are finalized, and possibly it is not the wrong thing to do when a man has the title of president....but it will never be his fault when something goes haywire...count on that!
    Posted by ZILLAGOD[/QUOTE]

    Sounds an awful lot like obama, except larry doesn't keep blaming Bush!!

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

    Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy?

    Whoa!! You're declaring them to be HOF'ers before they're even out of AAA? Haha! Settle down there sparky!!! Let's see what they each look like after the moss is shaved off from behind their ears, shall we? I see Lava as 1-2 yrs ahead of Iggy, and I'd let him start now with Salty backing him up. I'd let that slick fielding SS bake a bit longer in the AAA oven. If he can't hit above the Mendosa line, we can't use him on the big team. I know he's a great fielder, I do get it. But his body is still developing, and he needs to add some strength before he can hit at the big league level.  Patience my good friend!





    In Response to Re: Could ownership be making the call on Iggy?:
    [QUOTE]    "Let me be clear",  only the lib/left/rad/soc/marx/moonbats would keep these future  H O F's  down on the farm !!!!!!  Me thinks that tis is more about the redistribution of $$$$$$ than having the best players on the field !!!!
    Posted by Bill-806[/QUOTE]
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share