De La Rosa and Sands

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bisson1. Show Bisson1's posts

    De La Rosa and Sands

    Tough to tell seeing how the roster isn't even close to being set, but where do you guys see these two penciling in next year? Starting at AAA? Bullpen/Bench?

    I kinda forgot about them until now...

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

    Re: De La Rosa and Sands

    In response to Bisson1's comment:

    Tough to tell seeing how the roster isn't even close to being set, but where do you guys see these two penciling in next year? Starting at AAA? Bullpen/Bench?

    I kinda forgot about them until now...



    De la rosa will be groomed in the bullpen to be the next closer or set up man....Sands will dfa next yr 

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

    Re: De La Rosa and Sands

    If the Dodgers thought those guys were any good , they would not have included them in the deal. They certainly didn't have to include them.  The deal was about dumping salary.  Expecting much from them , or Webster , is wishful thinking.

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

    Re: De La Rosa and Sands

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

    If the Dodgers thought those guys were any good , they would not have included them in the deal. They certainly didn't have to include them.  The deal was about dumping salary.  Expecting much from them , or Webster , is wishful thinking.



    Keep repeating that and maybe someone besides you will believe it. I guess you must not expect much from Barnes either, since RDLR and Webster are ranked right with Barnes in most of the prospect rankings. Or maybe it's just that you can't bring yourself to admit that Ben actually made a good deal.

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

    Re: De La Rosa and Sands

    I have no idea what the intentions are with de La Rosa, but I am really interested to see what happens.  he could just fizzle of course, but he is on the verge of becoming a nasty pitcher.  I could see him starting, setting up, maybe even closing in a year or two.

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

    Re: De La Rosa and Sands

    In response to carnie's comment:

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

    If the Dodgers thought those guys were any good , they would not have included them in the deal. They certainly didn't have to include them.  The deal was about dumping salary.  Expecting much from them , or Webster , is wishful thinking.



    Keep repeating that and maybe someone besides you will believe it. I guess you must not expect much from Barnes either, since RDLR and Webster are ranked right with Barnes in most of the prospect rankings. Or maybe it's just that you can't bring yourself to admit that Ben actually made a good deal.




    I can believe that we lost 93 games last year. Ben's first year at the helm. I can believe that we had a better lineup last year than we do now.  I can believe that Barnes has yet to throw a pitch in AA Ball.  What I can't believe is that the Dodgers would give us anything of value in that trade.  Why would they ?

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

    Re: De La Rosa and Sands

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

    In response to carnie's comment:

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

    If the Dodgers thought those guys were any good , they would not have included them in the deal. They certainly didn't have to include them.  The deal was about dumping salary.  Expecting much from them , or Webster , is wishful thinking.



    Keep repeating that and maybe someone besides you will believe it. I guess you must not expect much from Barnes either, since RDLR and Webster are ranked right with Barnes in most of the prospect rankings. Or maybe it's just that you can't bring yourself to admit that Ben actually made a good deal.




    I can believe that we lost 93 games last year. Ben's first year at the helm. I can believe that we had a better lineup last year than we do now.  I can believe that Barnes has yet to throw a pitch in AA Ball.  What I can't believe is that the Dodgers would give us anything of value in that trade.  Why would they ?




    Because the Dodgers really wanted Agone. 

    Webster and De La Rosa will both be in AAA this year.  They are 22 and 23 and make up 2/3 of the best prospects in the Sox farm system.  There is absolutely reason to think they will contribute to the big club in the next few years.

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

    Re: De La Rosa and Sands

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

    In response to carnie's comment:

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

    If the Dodgers thought those guys were any good , they would not have included them in the deal. They certainly didn't have to include them.  The deal was about dumping salary.  Expecting much from them , or Webster , is wishful thinking.



    Keep repeating that and maybe someone besides you will believe it. I guess you must not expect much from Barnes either, since RDLR and Webster are ranked right with Barnes in most of the prospect rankings. Or maybe it's just that you can't bring yourself to admit that Ben actually made a good deal.




    I can believe that we lost 93 games last year. Ben's first year at the helm. I can believe that we had a better lineup last year than we do now.  I can believe that Barnes has yet to throw a pitch in AA Ball.  What I can't believe is that the Dodgers would give us anything of value in that trade.  Why would they ?




    Like I said you must really be down on the farm system, because RDLR and Webster are currently our 2nd and 3rd ranked pitching prospects.

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

    Re: De La Rosa and Sands

    In response to carnie's comment:

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

    In response to carnie's comment:

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

    If the Dodgers thought those guys were any good , they would not have included them in the deal. They certainly didn't have to include them.  The deal was about dumping salary.  Expecting much from them , or Webster , is wishful thinking.



    Keep repeating that and maybe someone besides you will believe it. I guess you must not expect much from Barnes either, since RDLR and Webster are ranked right with Barnes in most of the prospect rankings. Or maybe it's just that you can't bring yourself to admit that Ben actually made a good deal.




    I can believe that we lost 93 games last year. Ben's first year at the helm. I can believe that we had a better lineup last year than we do now.  I can believe that Barnes has yet to throw a pitch in AA Ball.  What I can't believe is that the Dodgers would give us anything of value in that trade.  Why would they ?




    Like I said you must really be down on the farm system, because RDLR and Webster are currently our 2nd and 3rd ranked pitching prospects.



    All that shows is that we have a serious lack of good pitching prospects. 

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

    Re: De La Rosa and Sands

    So this poster knows more than Keith Law, Red Sox and Dodger management?  Wow, when you get off your shirtfront at 7-11 please send your resume in because you know these guys are no good.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from hill55. Show hill55's posts

    Re: De La Rosa and Sands

    Baseball America ranked Rubby de la Rosa 90th on its 2011 preseason Top 100 prospect list and Allen Webster 95th on its 2012 list. John Sickels of Minor League Ball ranked Webster 40th on his recent preliminary list limited to top pitching prospects.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from mef429. Show mef429's posts

    Re: De La Rosa and Sands

    dont be foolish DG

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share