Ellsbury speaks about his injury last year

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

    Re: Ellsbury speaks about his injury last year

    Ellsbury indicting management, only if indirectly, would now seem to have been justified

    No, it was never justified. Return from API in 2010 season proved it wasn't.

    A stud is a horse that screws for owners. Varitek is a dutch stud, off the field.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from J-BAY. Show J-BAY's posts

    Re: Ellsbury speaks about his injury last year

    In Response to Re: Ellsbury speaks about his injury last year:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Ellsbury speaks about his injury last year : J, you are right, but I believe it may have been done as a PR move for Manny. I do think Youks has a temper problem though that no one seems to bring up. I think he hurts himself at the plate (more lately) by rolling his eyes a lot at pitch calls by umps. And I do think he is media-free of any criticism. People love Youkilis, the fans love him, the media loves him. I get it, I do, but some other guys get a lot of hell for their actions and he should also brunt some blame when he speaks or when he acts. It's always the other person's fault apparently with him. 
    Posted by dannycater[/QUOTE]

    could have been DC, but when the incident happened, Youk said he had no idea what he did or what provoked it.  I think youks antics are driven more by emotion then temper. regardless, I agree, it likely doesn't help him in the long run.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: Ellsbury speaks about his injury last year

    In Response to Re: Ellsbury speaks about his injury last year:
    [QUOTE]Guy is an up and coming CF. If the Sox plan was to have him play CF, then let him play CF. It's called experience, you gain the experience by playing the position your team is priming you to play. Ellsbury was primed to play CF. Who moves a guy for a 1-year experiment...dumb
    Posted by dannycater[/QUOTE]

    Two questions.

    1. On your first post on this thread, you said there was no need to sign Cameron. OK, the Sox had Ellsbury and Drew. Who should have been the third starting OF'er?

    2. Why is it dumb to move a versatile player. Take Yaz, for example. He came up in 1961, played three years as the LF'er, winning a Gold Glove in 1963. In 1964, he was moved to CF because he was the best option with the fielders that were there. Then in 1965, he moved back to LF, won more Gold Gloves. Then in 1970, because of the who they had, he playded the majority of his games at 1B then moved back to LF in 1971 to play LF, winning another Gold Glove. From '72-'76, he played the majority of his games at 1B, then moved fulltime back to LF in 1977 and won his final Gold Glove. He was a proven Gold Glove OF who  played the wall better than anyone, but because he was versatile, he moved to where he needed to play w/o complaining. So it shouldn't have been a big deal to move Ellsbury to LF for a year -- he had proven he could play there -- before going back to CF?


    Last year simply was unlucky. It's not exactly every day that an OF and IF collide and the OF sustains broken ribs. That happened twice last year and you can't predict it. Who know -- had Ellsbury stayed in CF, he might have collided with Pedey or Scutora on a fly ball to shallow CF, or he and another OF might have collided. Getting hurt like that is flukey no matter where you play.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: Ellsbury speaks about his injury last year

    In Response to Re: Ellsbury speaks about his injury last year:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Ellsbury speaks about his injury last year : Two questions. 1. On your first post on this thread, you said there was no need to sign Cameron. OK, the Sox had Ellsbury and Drew. Who should have been the third starting OF'er? 2. Why is it dumb to move a versatile player. Take Yaz, for example. He came up in 1961, played three years as the LF'er, winning a Gold Glove in 1963. In 1964, he was moved to CF because he was the best option with the fielders that were there. Then in 1965, he moved back to LF, won more Gold Gloves. Then in 1970, because of the who they had, he playded the majority of his games at 1B then moved back to LF in 1971 to play LF, winning another Gold Glove. From '72-'76, he played the majority of his games at 1B, then moved fulltime back to LF in 1977 and won his final Gold Glove. He was a proven Gold Glove OF who  played the wall better than anyone, but because he was versatile, he moved to where he needed to play w/o complaining. So it shouldn't have been a big deal to move Ellsbury to LF for a year -- he had proven he could play there -- before going back to CF? Last year simply was unlucky. It's not exactly every day that an OF and IF collide and the OF sustains broken ribs. That happened twice last year and you can't predict it. Who know -- had Ellsbury stayed in CF, he might have collided with Pedey or Scutora on a fly ball to shallow CF, or he and another OF might have collided. Getting hurt like that is flukey no matter where you play.
    Posted by royf19[/QUOTE]

    The 3rd OF could have been Jason Bay, who could have been signed. How did anyone know he would go into the tank? Yaz started as a SS by the way at Notre Dame I think. He was moved later in his career due because he was versatile. Where do you get that Ellsbury is versatile other than CF, his natural position? He played some LF at first or was it RF? My point was if the idea was for it to be for one year at Ellsbury's young juncture of his career, I don't see it as a positive for him. If anything, it immediately questioned his ability to play CF (which many on this board still question). Youkilis is more versatile than Ellsbury, so why wasn't he moved to LF? That would have opened up 1b for another signing/trade with Beltre signed to play 3b.

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

    Re: Ellsbury speaks about his injury last year

    You open up a pandora's box by citing Yaz, a Hall of Famer who could play 1b and OF, and compare him to Ellsbury, a guy who in my mind is a perfect guy to play CF. Little, quick, fast, gets to balls in the gaps. Cameron? 38, but well past his prime. 
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: Ellsbury speaks about his injury last year

    A lot of people say "well, then who would you have gotten"...My answers are usually guys who the Sox shipped out, or let go (free agency). Lowe was a guy who never had to leave. Wakefield is a guy who could have been shipped out a long time ago, but thankfully was kept due to his low salary, and he's still important to the team to this day. So I stand by Jason Bay as the answer to that question. 
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from trouts. Show trouts's posts

    Re: Ellsbury speaks about his injury last year

    To mrmojo: Thanks for posting this article. Maybe some positive changes have been made, as to how the Sox handle injuries in the future, as a result of last season's missteps with Jacoby'injury. It's also a good lesson that the Boston media can play a really negative role in a team's chemistry by twisting the story to get the most sensational slant to it, regardless of the facts. It also should be a warning to fans, that mindlessly buying media negativity and then regurgitating it only hurts the club that they profess to support. Finally, I hope that Youk has apologized to Ellsbury for making the negative comments about his rehabilitation and maybe next time he'll be more tight-lipped when it comes to bad-mouthing a teammate.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from DirtyWaterLover. Show DirtyWaterLover's posts

    Re: Ellsbury speaks about his injury last year

    Interesting article. 

    Putting Cam in CF was the right thing to do.  He had no experience with the wall, had a style that was better served in CF, and had a better arm. 

    Putting Ells in LF didn't cause the injury.  It was Beltre not paying attention to Ellsbury calling him off.  Beltr, as i recall, took out 2 LFs last year.

    As far as Ellsbury's injury - he took an awfully long time to get over broken ribs.  I'm not questioning his injury.  I'm just saying it was an extremely long recovery time.

    The fact that it was 5 broken ribs makes it understandable how he couldn't play.  But if people thought he only had 1 broken rib, then I think it's understandable how they would expect him to get back on the field.

    Playing with broken ribs is about pain management.  I think he should be expected to play with a broken rib after 6 weeks.  But 5 broken ribs is a different story.  I can understand not being able to play with 5 broken ribs even after 6 weeks.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: Ellsbury speaks about his injury last year

    In Response to Re: Ellsbury speaks about his injury last year:
    [QUOTE]To mrmojo: Thanks for posting this article. Maybe some positive changes have been made, as to how the Sox handle injuries in the future, as a result of last season's missteps with Jacoby'injury. It's also a good lesson that the Boston media can play a really negative role in a team's chemistry by twisting the story to get the most sensational slant to it, regardless of the facts. It also should be a warning to fans, that mindlessly buying media negativity and then regurgitating it only hurts the club that they profess to support. Finally, I hope that Youk has apologized to Ellsbury for making the negative comments about his rehabilitation and maybe next time he'll be more tight-lipped when it comes to bad-mouthing a teammate.
    Posted by trouts[/QUOTE]

    trouts, excellent post. the most important part is the PR machine, sometimes it's spun directly from the organization and fed to the media. Sometimes it's a columnists' way of trying to create a buzz to get the fans going. Fans do eat up what is written, what is reported. It's important that fans know that they have to also realize there is some bias in the way today's blog-infested media has twisted many Sox happenings in recent seasons. 

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

    Re: Ellsbury speaks about his injury last year

    Dirty Water, Joe Thornton still takes B's fan abuse over his non-productive play during the 2004 playoffs. He played with broken ribs and they were never reported during that time. My point is that are you a medical doctor who can properly tell how effective a player can be based on number of weeks to heal? If you play through the pain, the way Thornton did, you still get criticized. It's a no win situation for the player.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from dgalehouse. Show dgalehouse's posts

    Re: Ellsbury speaks about his injury last year

    If you ever had broken ribs , you would know that there is no way you could swing the bat.  People should have given Ellsbury every benefit of the doubt last year , as he had always played hard and aggressively and never before had given any indication of being a fragile player.  As for the Youk and Manny incident , I am not sure who was at fault. Probably a case of both of them having some of the blame. I will never kill any member of the 2004 Champs, including Manny and Damon.  They helped change the course of Red Sox history.  However , you have to keep in mind that Manny lost a lot of people when he decked the elderly traveling secretary.  That was totally out of line.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSoxKimmi. Show RedSoxKimmi's posts

    Re: Ellsbury speaks about his injury last year

    In Response to Re: Ellsbury speaks about his injury last year:
    [QUOTE]Interesting article.  Putting Cam in CF was the right thing to do.  He had no experience with the wall, had a style that was better served in CF, and had a better arm.  Putting Ells in LF didn't cause the injury. Posted by DirtyWaterLover[/QUOTE]

    I agree, putting Cam in CF was the right thing to do for several reasons.  Not re-signing Bay was also the right thing to do, not because of the first two years of the contract, but because of the drop off in production that he was likely to experience bot offensively and defensively in the last years of the contract.

    Danny - Cam was 38 but in his two years prior to signing with Boston, he had showed no signs of decline, either offensively or defensively.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: Ellsbury speaks about his injury last year

    kimmi, i don't like experiments or 1-year solutions. I love Adrian Beltre, loved him on the Sox, and I hated that I knew months in advanced he would not be signed. I don't like short-term players especially getting in the way of long-term players like Ellsbury. It may have been a positional move, but it was a slight on Jacoby, and it is not how you treat a guy who performed quite well in CF the season before. 
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSoxKimmi. Show RedSoxKimmi's posts

    Re: Ellsbury speaks about his injury last year

    As far as the Youk and his emotion are concerned, it's damned if you do and damned if you don't.   Drew gets bashed all the time for not showing any emotion, Youk gets bashed for showing too much.

    I agree that Youk should not have said anything regarding Ellsbury.  That was something that he should have kept to himself.

    While Youk is not doing himself any favors with the umpires, I really can't criticize him for that.  He's a passionate and emotional player who wants to succeed in every AB, even if his team is up by 10.  When you're accustomed to leaving everything you have out on the field, it's easier said than done to control your emotions. 
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSoxKimmi. Show RedSoxKimmi's posts

    Re: Ellsbury speaks about his injury last year


    The next time the Sox have a walk off win, watch the guys coming out of the dugout.   The two most excited guys (and often the first ones out to celebrate) are Youk and Papelbon.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: Ellsbury speaks about his injury last year

    Youks is a great guy, I'm sure, but he does let his temper get the best of him, and he does show up umpires, and I think it's showing in his at bats. He's not getting called balls the way he used to, and he keeps rolling his eyes. I think another guy who goes wild is Pedroia. He gets excited in big walkoffs.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSoxKimmi. Show RedSoxKimmi's posts

    Re: Ellsbury speaks about his injury last year

    In Response to Re: Ellsbury speaks about his injury last year:
    [QUOTE]kimmi, i don't like experiments or 1-year solutions. I love Adrian Beltre, loved him on the Sox, and I hated that I knew months in advanced he would not be signed. I don't like short-term players especially getting in the way of long-term players like Ellsbury. It may have been a positional move, but it was a slight on Jacoby, and it is not how you treat a guy who performed quite well in CF the season before. 
    Posted by dannycater[/QUOTE]

    I can understand what you're saying about 1 year experiments or solutions, but sometimes it makes more sense than signing someone long term that may handcuff the team in a few years.

    I am a huge JD Drew fan, but not a fan of long term contracts (usually anything over 4 years) because of the dropoff that is likely to be seen in the last year(s).

    Remember that Theo is not just looking at the upcoming year, he is looking several years down the road as well.

    I can understand how Jacoby might feel slighted, but IMO, any player has to be willing to put the team ahead of himself.  It was the best move for the team to put Cam in CF, and that move might have also been beneficial to Ells had he not gotten injured.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: Ellsbury speaks about his injury last year

    Drew's skills diminished fast, but if he was hurt, it's sad. He is clearly going out with a whimper.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from ctredsoxfanhugh. Show ctredsoxfanhugh's posts

    Re: Ellsbury speaks about his injury last year

    Always stood by Ellsbury.  Saw right through ALL the ridiculousness, and was very disappointed with some fans and some of the media.  I realize Jacoby may not always be in Boston, but he will always be one of my favorite young players
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: Ellsbury speaks about his injury last year

    I agree with Cater. If a young player is in your plans long-term in CF, you don't move him elsewhere for a year or two. ( Cameron was signed for two. ) Not as he enters his prime. So what MIGHT have really been going on?  It's possible that Theo even then was thinking that he'd try to sign Crawford and thus make Ellsbury dispensable.  Since Theo loves metrics, he might have been influenced by the numbers purporting to show that Ellsbury was nothing special as a center fielder, and all the talk about "bad routes," etc.  Theo does his job pretty well, but what he knows about playing baseball would fit into a small shoe locker. He must rely mostly if not entirely on what he's told and what comes up on the computer screen. Or on his own covetous instinct.  Until gets SS right long-term, that instinct remains suspect. That position is special.
    But now Ellsbury has added a twist on the field. If he keeps playing as he has been, the Sox may not be able to afford to keep him on top of contractual obligations coming up soon and then later. If Ellsbury is traded or signs elsewhere as a FA, Theo better hope to heaven that Crawford has a helluva career in Boston.
    Mind you, all of this falls under "might have" or "might be." 
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: Ellsbury speaks about his injury last year

    In Response to Re: Ellsbury speaks about his injury last year:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Ellsbury speaks about his injury last year : The 3rd OF could have been Jason Bay, who could have been signed. How did anyone know he would go into the tank? Yaz started as a SS by the way at Notre Dame I think. He was moved later in his career due because he was versatile. Where do you get that Ellsbury is versatile other than CF, his natural position? He played some LF at first or was it RF? My point was if the idea was for it to be for one year at Ellsbury's young juncture of his career, I don't see it as a positive for him. If anything, it immediately questioned his ability to play CF (which many on this board still question). Youkilis is more versatile than Ellsbury, so why wasn't he moved to LF? That would have opened up 1b for another signing/trade with Beltre signed to play 3b.
    Posted by dannycater[/QUOTE]

    Don't get silly here. How is Youk more versatile than Ellsbury? Youk can play first and third but he wasn't much of LF. He was an emergency LF like Yaz was an emergency 3B. Butchered the position but did what he had to do to try to help the team. Ellsbury proved he could play LF. He played 22 games (15 GS) in 2007 and 58 games (36 starts) w/o an error. 

    Ellsbury clearly was the best option to play LF with the personel the Sox had after signing Cameron. You said they could have had Bay. He already turned down the offer, so now you go to the next plan. The youngsters weren't ready and Cameron likely was the best option. Cameron was proven to be a better CF and Ellsbury had proven he could play LF. That is it didn't work out because of injuries was more to bad luck.

    Back to the Yaz example. He was moved out of SS as soon as he was drafted because he was more suited to the OF and was penciled in to be Williams' replacement. Yet in his fourth season, he was moved out of his best position where he won a GG -- nearly the same timeline as Ellsbury -- because he was the best option at the time.

    Whether or not it was a positive for Ellsbury had everything to do on how it was portrayed to him. If the FO told him that he needed to move to LF for a year because there wasn't a better OF'er as the third OF than Cameron and they didn't trust a newcomer to play LF so they needed him to play LF because they could trust him out there, it shouldn't have been a problem.

    And you don't even have to go back to Yaz. Look at Youk. He wanted to play 3B and was supposed to be the 3B of the future. Yet when the Sox acquired Lowell, they moved Youk to 1B, not the veteran. It didn't seem to hurt Youk. He simply became a GG at that position. So why should it be different with Ellsbury. Because of the players the Sox ended up with last year, he was the best option to move to LF. It's no different than Yaz moving to CF for a year or Youk moving to 1B for five years.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Ellsbury speaks about his injury last year

    In Response to Re: Ellsbury speaks about his injury last year:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Ellsbury speaks about his injury last year : Don't get silly here. How is Youk more versatile than Ellsbury? Youk can play first and third but he wasn't much of LF. He was an emergency LF like Yaz was an emergency 3B. Butchered the position but did what he had to do to try to help the team. Ellsbury proved he could play LF. He played 22 games (15 GS) in 2007 and 58 games (36 starts) w/o an error.  Ellsbury clearly was the best option to play LF with the personel the Sox had after signing Cameron. You said they could have had Bay. He already turned down the offer, so now you go to the next plan. The youngsters weren't ready and Cameron likely was the best option. Cameron was proven to be a better CF and Ellsbury had proven he could play LF. That is it didn't work out because of injuries was more to bad luck. Back to the Yaz example. He was moved out of SS as soon as he was drafted because he was more suited to the OF and was penciled in to be Williams' replacement. Yet in his fourth season, he was moved out of his best position where he won a GG -- nearly the same timeline as Ellsbury -- because he was the best option at the time. Whether or not it was a positive for Ellsbury had everything to do on how it was portrayed to him. If the FO told him that he needed to move to LF for a year because there wasn't a better OF'er as the third OF than Cameron and they didn't trust a newcomer to play LF so they needed him to play LF because they could trust him out there, it shouldn't have been a problem. And you don't even have to go back to Yaz. Look at Youk. He wanted to play 3B and was supposed to be the 3B of the future. Yet when the Sox acquired Lowell, they moved Youk to 1B, not the veteran. It didn't seem to hurt Youk. He simply became a GG at that position. So why should it be different with Ellsbury. Because of the players the Sox ended up with last year, he was the best option to move to LF. It's no different than Yaz moving to CF for a year or Youk moving to 1B for five years.
    Posted by royf19[/QUOTE]

    Nice post Roy.  Maybe Youk's comments had more to do with Ellsbury's handling of losing his position than where he re-habbed.  We didn't learn until Youk moved back to 3rd that that was where he preferred to play.  With Ellsbury, we heard about how unhappy he was before the season even began.

    This article strikes me as Ellsbury setting the stage for contract negotiations.  Does he really need to say there will be no home-town discount?  Is Jackie MacMullen a psedonymn for "uber-agent" Scott Boras?


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

    Re: Ellsbury speaks about his injury last year

    In Response to Re: Ellsbury speaks about his injury last year:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Ellsbury speaks about his injury last year : Don't get silly here. How is Youk more versatile than Ellsbury? Youk can play first and third but he wasn't much of LF. He was an emergency LF like Yaz was an emergency 3B. Butchered the position but did what he had to do to try to help the team. Ellsbury proved he could play LF. He played 22 games (15 GS) in 2007 and 58 games (36 starts) w/o an error.  Ellsbury clearly was the best option to play LF with the personel the Sox had after signing Cameron. You said they could have had Bay. He already turned down the offer, so now you go to the next plan. The youngsters weren't ready and Cameron likely was the best option. Cameron was proven to be a better CF and Ellsbury had proven he could play LF. That is it didn't work out because of injuries was more to bad luck. Back to the Yaz example. He was moved out of SS as soon as he was drafted because he was more suited to the OF and was penciled in to be Williams' replacement. Yet in his fourth season, he was moved out of his best position where he won a GG -- nearly the same timeline as Ellsbury -- because he was the best option at the time. Whether or not it was a positive for Ellsbury had everything to do on how it was portrayed to him. If the FO told him that he needed to move to LF for a year because there wasn't a better OF'er as the third OF than Cameron and they didn't trust a newcomer to play LF so they needed him to play LF because they could trust him out there, it shouldn't have been a problem. And you don't even have to go back to Yaz. Look at Youk. He wanted to play 3B and was supposed to be the 3B of the future. Yet when the Sox acquired Lowell, they moved Youk to 1B, not the veteran. It didn't seem to hurt Youk. He simply became a GG at that position. So why should it be different with Ellsbury. Because of the players the Sox ended up with last year, he was the best option to move to LF. It's no different than Yaz moving to CF for a year or Youk moving to 1B for five years.
    Posted by royf19[/QUOTE]
    If the FO told Ellsbury that he had to move to LF for a year, then why did they sign Cameron for two years? My guess -- just that -- is that Boston did not view Ellsbury as the center fielder of the future, for better or worse. Two years would have been a long time "out of position" for a player Ellsbury's age and with his obvious need for experience in center. As far as I know, he was groomed to play center, even though he's seen playing time in left.  He had every reason to think before ST last year that he would be Boston's CF for years to come if he could hold the job. He would have been a dummy if he didn't suspect that the move to LF in order to accommodate Cameron might have been a peek into Theo's mind about the future of the position.  That and other stuff that happened last year could still be somewhere in his mind.
    If he keeps performing as is or even close to it, he has a big payday coming up down the road. It's far from a cinch that he will get it from Boston.  He may even be traded to a club that is willing to pay him. 

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

    Re: Ellsbury speaks about his injury last year

    In Response to Re: Ellsbury speaks about his injury last year:
    [QUOTE]Interesting article.  Putting Cam in CF was the right thing to do.  He had no experience with the wall, had a style that was better served in CF, and had a better arm.  Putting Ells in LF didn't cause the injury.  It was Beltre not paying attention to Ellsbury calling him off.  Beltr, as i recall, took out 2 LFs last year. As far as Ellsbury's injury - he took an awfully long time to get over broken ribs.  I'm not questioning his injury.  I'm just saying it was an extremely long recovery time. The fact that it was 5 broken ribs makes it understandable how he couldn't play.  But if people thought he only had 1 broken rib, then I think it's understandable how they would expect him to get back on the field. Playing with broken ribs is about pain management.  I think he should be expected to play with a broken rib after 6 weeks.  But 5 broken ribs is a different story.  I can understand not being able to play with 5 broken ribs even after 6 weeks.
    Posted by DirtyWaterLover[/QUOTE]

    I had cracked ribs when I was a lot younger when I was running long distance, about 90-100 miles a week marathon training, and with three cracked ribs couldn't run for over three months because of the level of pain, and I'm one with high pain tolerance.

    For an idiot like Softylaw to question Ellsbury's ability or want to play show the level of intelligence of Softylaw. Basically not very bright. 

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

    Re: Ellsbury speaks about his injury last year

    In Response to Re: Ellsbury speaks about his injury last year:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Ellsbury speaks about his injury last year : If the FO told Ellsbury that he had to move to LF for a year, then why did they sign Cameron for two years? My guess -- just that -- is that Boston did not view Ellsbury as the center fielder of the future, for better or worse. Two years would have been a long time "out of position" for a player Ellsbury's age and with his obvious need for experience in center. As far as I know, he was groomed to play center, even though he's seen playing time in left.  He had every reason to think before ST last year that he would be Boston's CF for years to come if he could hold the job. He would have been a dummy if he didn't suspect that the move to LF in order to accommodate Cameron might have been a peek into Theo's mind about the future of the position.  That and other stuff that happened last year could still be somewhere in his mind. If he keeps performing as is or even close to it, he has a big payday coming up down the road. It's far from a cinch that he will get it from Boston.  He may even be traded to a club that is willing to pay him. 
    Posted by expitch[/QUOTE]

    I don't think Cameron's signing for two years meant that an Ellsbury-Cameron-Drew PF was set in stone for two years. If it worked and the Sox won a W.S., then they would have come back with it. If it didn't work, which is what happened, then they would make changes.

    Who knows, maybe they were targeting Crawford and figured they'd go with Ellsbury-Cameron-Drew for one year, but had to give Cameron two years to sign him. They probably figured Cameron still would have given them flexibitlity depending on how Ellsbury developed.

    It's reasonable to not like the move. But to say it was flat-out wrong to move Ellsbury out of CF for a year (or two) because he was being "groomed" as the future CF is unreasonable.

    Great players are moved out of their natural position for a multitude of reasons w/o it affecting their careers. (Again, look at the Youk example).

    Thome was the Indians 3B of the future. But after 2 1/2 years there, the Indians were trying to bolster their lineup. They signed Travis Fryman, not because they were looking to replace Thome at 3B, but because he was the best player out there. Fryman was the better 3B so Thome moved to 1B.

    Players move out of their natural position (or position they're being "groomed" for) all the time. Often times, it says more about the player being moved in a good way because it shows they're good enough to play other positions.

    It shouldn't have been a problem that he was moved to LF. It wasn't going to affect his contract. If he hit well, it wouldn't matter if he played LF or CF. (Look at Rickey Henderson and Carl Crawford).

    I had no problem with Ellsbury last year. I understand how broken ribs can be and how it takes time for them to heal. I thought most of the criticism was unwarrented. (Like the story said, there probably should have been better communication from both sides).

    If he was btching about moving from CF to LF, then yes, I would have a problem with that. You do what you have to do for the good of the team. History is filled with players who move out of their best position because there was no other player to play a position and that player was the best option. These players do it for the good of their team. 

    Heck, I'm no fan of Pete Rose but look at how many times he changed positions. He played 939 games at 1B, 673 in LF, 634 at 3B, 628 at 2B, 590 in RF and 73 in CF. And he was pretty good defensively -- won 2 GG in the OF -- no matter where he played. If anyone should have been able to lock a position down, it would have been Rose, yet he was willing to play where ever the Reds/Phillies needed him to play.
     

Share