Ellsbury

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

    Re: Ellsbury


    Boras will demand $125m , not a penny less!

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

    Re: Ellsbury

    We should know by Wednesday Morning if he's ready to come back

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Kingface12. Show Kingface12's posts

    Re: Ellsbury

    So Ells may be returning in a few days.  Softy.....good thing you didn't take the bet.  Just another wrong prediction on your part!

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Kingface12. Show Kingface12's posts

    Re: Ellsbury

    In response to RedSoxFireman's comment:

    Farrell said he was being optismistic on a few days. With his broken foot, this more a show than substance. Ellsbury will last about as long as the time he missed months and then came back and said he was healthy and played one or two games and rolled in the infield and quit the rest of that season.




    Uhhhhhhhh......no idea what this means....I left the Rosetta Stone in my office.  Time for your parents to put you to bed....

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from S5. Show S5's posts

    Re: Ellsbury

    In response to RedSoxFireman's comment:

    Farrell said he was being optismistic on a few days. With his broken foot, this more a show than substance. Ellsbury will last about as long as the time he missed months and then came back and said he was healthy and played one or two games and rolled in the infield and quit the rest of that season.



    Ok. I get it now.  If he of the "reverse pivot" tries to come back before he should, "play through it", and reinjures himself he gets criticized for being out too long.  If he doesn't try to come back and instead waits for an injury to heal he also gets criticized for being out too long. 

    Is there a number LESS that Zero on the credibility scale?  Because if there is, that's Softy's rating. 

    But of course this is typical of Softy.  He'd rather post something completly contradictory and irrational and then take the abuse for it than be ignored.  All that time you took off from the board and spent with your shrink didn't help, did it? 

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Ellsbury

    In response to S5's comment:

    In response to RedSoxFireman's comment:

     

    Farrell said he was being optismistic on a few days. With his broken foot, this more a show than substance. Ellsbury will last about as long as the time he missed months and then came back and said he was healthy and played one or two games and rolled in the infield and quit the rest of that season.

     



    Ok. I get it now.  If he of the "reverse pivot" tries to come back before he should, "play through it", and reinjures himself he gets criticized for being out too long.  If he doesn't try to come back and instead waits for an injury to heal he also gets criticized for being out too long. 

     

    Is there a number LESS that Zero on the credibility scale?  Because if there is, that's Softy's rating. 

    But of course this is typical of Softy.  He'd rather post something completly contradictory and irrational and then take the abuse for it than be ignored.  All that time you took off from the board and spent with your shrink didn't help, did it? 



    Being locked in a padded cell for over a month is not good therapy.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: Ellsbury

    In response to Kingface12's comment:

    So Ells may be returning in a few days.  Softy.....good thing you didn't take the bet.  Just another wrong prediction on your part!




    Ellsbury has not been written into the lineup yet. He has not been on the field. Softy has every right to be skeptical about his return, given his history. I think there is a good chance he will make it back, but I would not take that to the bank just yet. Even if he does make it back, I have no ideal how long he will be playing. His injury could force him back off the field.

     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: Ellsbury

    In response to RedSoxFireman's comment:


    "Getting back on the field" doesn't mean anything. With his broken foot, this is a case where Ellsbury and his agent want to exploit an opportunity to change Ellsbury's correct prima donna pretzel image by having him come back on the field. They have calcualted that if he doesn't do well, he'll get more money by showing he'll give it all for the next team he plays on. They can write off any poor post season metrics by saying he was "playing hurt for the team". In the event he slaps a few hits and steals a base or two, they'll claim he's a warrior superstar who is better than most CF'ers even when he is playing hurt to give it all for the team.

    In reality, the fact that Boras and Ellsbury came out immediately and said "he'll be back before year end" should be all that is needed for Red Sox management to rule him out for the rest of the season. The team has played better without him, and using Nava and Gomes more with Victorino and Bradley is the way to go. 

    Over all  the years and all he and his agent's stunts, Ellsbury needs to be kicked off the bus.

     



    Of course the fact that this is a contract year plays a big role in his possible return. Like I said earlier, unless he is dead, he will make an appearance. Not showing up would certainly affect his next contract.  That said, its absurd to believe that this is a better team without him.

     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from S5. Show S5's posts

    Re: Ellsbury

    In response to RedSoxFireman's comment:

    Quite clear the results show this is a better team without him.




    You don't know that because you don't have knowledge of how good this team would be with him.   You may have OPINION, but no KNOWLEDGE.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: Ellsbury

    In response to RedSoxFireman's comment:

    Quite clear the results show this is a better team without him.




    Using WHO as his replacement? Bradley? I don't think so. Gomes as a regular player? Carp? Nope. None of those guys have produced the kinds of overall numbers Ellsbury has for the Sox this year when you consider his speed on the bases and his defensive ability. Gomes and Carp have thrived in their platoon roles. Ellsbury has thrived as an every day player-except when he is hurt, and thats a concern of mine as well. He misses way too much playing time.

     
  14. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Ellsbury

    In response to RedSoxFireman's comment:

    Quite clear the results show this is a better team without him.



    Just like they're a better team when Lackey doesn't play.  Guess they should keep him off of the post season rotation.

    I wish their was a way to filter forum posts so I only see softy's posts.  Sometimes I need a quick laugh.

     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: Ellsbury

    In response to RedSoxFireman's comment:

    Victorino and more of Gomes and Nava, with Bradley and Carp off the bench has been better.

    But forget that narrative. Ellsbury's foot is broken. No reason to re-work a winning team just so he can go out there and see what happens. He was always about "shutting it down" in the past. A broken foot isn't a micro-fractured ribs or dislocated and relocated shoulder without any tears or breaks. Interesting that he and his agent immediatley shouted "he'll be back this season".



    Victorino is also nursing some nagging injuries. I think that if he were healthy he would be a more than adequate CF to replace Ellsbury. However, IF Ellsbury can play and be effective we don't have to choose. Vic is having a gold glove kind of year in RF and is doing the job at the plate as well. Having the two of them at the top of our lineup can wreak havoc on the basepaths. Gomes and Carp are good part time players, but I would not willingly substitute either or both of them as Ellsbury's replacement. The issue is that Ellsbury has to play effectively. If he is limited to being ineffective by his injury then I would remove him and do the best we can with the other guys. But if he can play well, he is my starting CF.
    I share your suspicions about the timing of the announcement. I am quite sure that both Ellsbury and Bora$$ are aware of his reputation and would love to try not to further it. In a noncontract year I believe the attitude would be different.

     
  18. This post has been removed.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Ellsbury

    The team did so great without Jacoby in 2010 and 2012.

    Sox4ever

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

    Re: Ellsbury

    In response to RedSoxFireman's comment:

    I didn't realize Ellsbury was a starting pitcher who has pitched well for the first time in many years. Lackey is an Orange and Ellsbury is a rotten Tomato.



    You are right that it is apples and oranges.  You would expect the starting pitcher would have a much larger effect on the games he plays than a position player.  Noone would argue that Lackey has had a good year, but the sox are still only .500 in the games he plays.

     
  21. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Ellsbury

    In response to RedSoxFireman's comment:

     

    The team did so well with Ellsbury in 2004 and 2007 (no, he wasn't more than a bench player in 2007), and they've been doing better when he doesn't play in 2013.

     




    I guess you're right.  They were better off without Ted Williams too since he wasn't there in 2004 or 2007 or 1918.  And no I'm not comparing Ellsbury to Williams, just like I wasn't comparing him to Lackey, just showing the simple mindedness of your post.

     
  23. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Ellsbury

    In response to RedSoxFireman's comment:

    I was responding to your alter ego, Moonslav. Ellsbury was on the 40 man roster in 2007, and your Ted Williams wasn't on the team shows the mindlessness of your catatonic retort.



    And that's relevant why? 

    Why did you mention 2004, he wasn't on the 40 man then?

    Continue making no sense, it's ok, we're all used to it.

     
  25. This post has been removed.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share