Inglesias

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

    Inglesias

    Iglesias, the future SS for the Red Sox is in the minor league with shin issues. The RS, paying him $6 million a year to play minor league ball --  for years -- with his shin issues, decide not to try and remedy that situation, supposedly. For years, again, $6M per, they just let that go. They call him up to the ML, along with his shins, and still don't pursue any remedy for that. Let's not forget that this guy is earning $6M a year, and could probably afford to have a physician living on his property.

    When he gets to the Tigers, it doesn't really go so well. And it's not only because of his legs. They then announce they're having his legs taken care of for him, and he could be out for the entire season. Incredibly, posters still continue to talk about this being a bad trade.

    At what point does it become clear to the posters that still call this a bad trade, that it may not be his legs that are the biggest problem? Although, you can probably add that to the mix.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from 37stories. Show 37stories's posts

    Re: Inglesias

    His name isn't Inglesias.

    This subject isn't interesting to me anymore. Iggy was overhyped from the start, now he is gone. and on the DL.

    He simply isn't relevant anymore.

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

    Re: Inglesias

    kim, let's not overstate things.  The Sox were paying Iggy $2 million a year, not $6 million.  This year he's making $1.65 million.

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

    Re: Inglesias

    In response to 37stories' comment:

    His name isn't Inglesias.

    This subject isn't interesting to me anymore. Iggy was overhyped from the start, now he is gone. and on the DL.

    He simply isn't relevant anymore.



    Then you're not reading the current threads. Because it's still considered a bad deal for some who constantly rate him against Peavy.

    I just don't know what it takes to be considered a good deal since this seems to have turned out to be a great deal for the Sox. And we still don't know the final outcome of how great it could be.

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

    Re: Inglesias

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    kim, let's not overstate things.  The Sox were paying Iggy $2 million a year, not $6 million.  This year he's making $1.65 million.



    Was it $2M? Then I'm sorry. I thought it was $6M. Still, you don't pay a guy $2M per year in spring training and supposedly ignore any health issues he may have. I just don't buy it.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from steven11. Show steven11's posts

    Re: Inglesias

    In response to kimsaysthis' comment:

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    kim, let's not overstate things.  The Sox were paying Iggy $2 million a year, not $6 million.  This year he's making $1.65 million.



    Was it $2M? Then I'm sorry. I thought it was $6M. Still, you don't pay a guy $2M per year in spring training and supposedly ignore any health issues he may have. I just don't buy it.




    I think everyone has moved on.  How many games did Iggy miss while a sox due to splints?  Sure, now he has issues but they are someone else's issues. 

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

    Re: Inglesias

    The RS, paying him $6 million a year to play minor league ball --  for years -- with his shin issues, decide not to try and remedy that situation, supposedly. For years, again, $6M per, they just let that go. They call him up to the ML, along with his shins, and still don't pursue any remedy for that. Let's not forget that this guy is earning $6M a year, and could probably afford to have a physician living on his property.

    I don't have the foggiest idea of where this is coming from.  As others have mentioned-

    1-It's $2M/year

    2-I don't remember him missing a game for us.

    3-I assume they tried to address the shins, unless you think the RS are complete idiots.  I'm not sure there is a magic wand for stress-induced micro-fractures.

    4-What's the alternative to $2M/year?  He's Cuban.  He's not coming to Boston because we're the 'good guys'.  He's coming for the money.

    5-He's followed the same path as 10,000 before him.  He worked his way up from the minors, struggled to establish himself, and then settled in.

    6-He helped us win a pennant, and when one of SPs got injured, we traded him because we felt we had a surplus at SS.

    There's really nothing here.  This happens 10x every single year.  Good prospect for needed veteran.

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

    Re: Inglesias

    Interesting !!!!

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

    Re: Inglesias

    I can be your hero baby...I can take away the pain.

    I will stand by you forever...you an take my breath away.

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

    Re: Inglesias

    Kim what bugs some of us is that the Sox have a tendency to prize offensive production out of shortstop even as the semi-post-PED era has reduced offense in general and out of that position specifically. Those of us who value a great defensive shortstop get a bit frustrated that since Cabrera, who won us a World series way back when, we've been in constant pursuit of offensive production at that position, sometimes to the detriment of the team. 

    With the Iggy trade, I think it's unfair to call it a good or bad trade - yet. We have to see how it plays out over the next couple of years. 

    I think in the end it will end up being pretty neutral - by that I mean both teams will be able to point to benefits. 

    Peavy could have sealed the deal on this trade, but he really wasn't that great in the postseason. Iggy, on the other hand, made a surprise impact on the trade with critical errors that helped us to win the ALCS and get a ring. 

    Bottom line is when we made the trade we weren't sure if Buch could be healthy or not. It's hard to be overly critical of the trade given we got a ring out of it that Iggy in his own way helped us to get. 

    I'll save judgement for now, but in the end it will be either a good, decent, or neutral trade in my opinion. Depends a lot on how we do at shortstop going forward, if Iggy ends up being an everyday player and so on. 

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

    Re: Inglesias

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:

    I can be your hero baby...I can take away the pain.

    I will stand by you forever...you an take my breath away.

     

    I love that song....

     

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

    Re: Inglesias

    In response to BostonTrollSpanker's comment:

    With the Iggy trade, I think it's unfair to call it a good or bad trade - yet. We have to see how it plays out over the next couple of years. 




    I disagree that we have to see how it plays out over the next several years.  The ultimate goal for making any moves is to win a World Series Championship.  Trading Iglesias for Peavy, along with several other moves and factors, led the Sox to the championship.  That alone, IMO, makes it a good move regardless of what Iggy or the Red Sox do during the remainder of Iggy's career.  Never mind that Iggy was dispensable and that the Sox needed more pitching, and that they need Peavy this year with Dempster's retirement.

     

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from RSPCB73. Show RSPCB73's posts

    Re: Inglesias

    Iggy train's left the station.  Let's focus on what we have.  Who knows, Bogarts will make all this moot within a coule of months.

    Red Sox 2014 World Series Champions. Bruins 2014 Stanley Cup Champions. Patriots 2015 Super Bowl Champions. Celtics??????

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

    Re: Inglesias

    Kim what bugs some of us is that the Sox have a tendency to prize offensive production out of shortstop even as the semi-post-PED era has reduced offense in general and out of that position specifically.

    I consider that an old wives tale.  How many offense-only SS's have we had?  Renteria  could hit, but was also a multiple GG-winner.  Gonzo was here twice with no bat.  Lugo was split, but didn't really hit or field.  Drew had a good offensive season, but he is probably more on the glove side.  Iglesias can't hit, and Marrero was drafted purely for defense.

    I think we've simply sought the best overall solution, but our SS's after Nomar were much better defensively than offensively.

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

    Re: Inglesias

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:

    Kim what bugs some of us is that the Sox have a tendency to prize offensive production out of shortstop even as the semi-post-PED era has reduced offense in general and out of that position specifically.

    I consider that an old wives tale.  How many offense-only SS's have we had?  Renteria  could hit, but was also a multiple GG-winner.  Gonzo was here twice with no bat.  Lugo was split, but didn't really hit or field.  Drew had a good offensive season, but he is probably more on the glove side.  Iglesias can't hit, and Marrero was drafted purely for defense.

    I think we've simply sought the best overall solution, but our SS's after Nomar were much better defensively than offensively.

    Nomar was a horrible fielder, especially at the end of his time with Boston.

    The Cabrera trade and Pokey Reese signing was certainly a strong move towards defense at SS, but it was short-lived. Once we won the ring, they were gone.

    Renteria stunk on D when here with a -9.6 UZR/150.

    Alex Gonzalez Part I was a lot of fun to watch. (+9.7 UZR/150 in 2006)

    Lugo had decent range, which offset the rest of his defense enough to make hima plus on defense, until he got hurt. His UZR/150 in 2007 was only -0.6, but his RnGR was +3.2.Unfortunately, that was early on with Boston (2008 was -3.3 and -63.1 in 2009).

    Alex Cora was supposed to be good, but was -8.1 in 2008. Lowrie was never known for defense, especially range.

    Nick Green had a plus UZR but was a joke of a fielder. Alex Gonzalez Part II ended up +14.1 in 2009, but looked worse to me than the Part I version.

    Mark Scutaro should have moved to 2B a year earlier, but with Boston, that was not going to happen. He had a -4.5 UZR/150 in 2010. Lowrie was aat -15.5. 2010 was not a good year for Sox SS defense. He did edge over on the plus side for 2011, but bad years from Lowrie and others kept the team under zero. Scoot was never signed for his defense.

    Mike Aviles did better than I expected (+5.2 in 2012), but I seriously doubt we signed him thinking we'd be plus on defense.

    Drew also did better than expected (+6.7), but we traded away Iggy. Out of 37 MLB SSs with 750 innings played since 2012, Iggy placed 2nd best at +18.3.

     

    I can see the case being made that we have not valued defense at SS as much as other teams, but we have had some good ones along the way....

     

     




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

    Re: Inglesias

    This whole topic has become tiresome. It is my feeling that it was not a good trade. I think Iglesias can and will become an outstanding shortstop for years to come. I think Peavy's best days are behind him. I do not think he was pivotal to winning a championship last year. I do hope that he stays healthy and helps us this year. Obviously, others feel differently about the trade. It is high time to end these discussions.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from kimsaysthis. Show kimsaysthis's posts

    Re: Inglesias

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:

    The RS, paying him $6 million a year to play minor league ball --  for years -- with his shin issues, decide not to try and remedy that situation, supposedly. For years, again, $6M per, they just let that go. They call him up to the ML, along with his shins, and still don't pursue any remedy for that. Let's not forget that this guy is earning $6M a year, and could probably afford to have a physician living on his property.

    I don't have the foggiest idea of where this is coming from.  As others have mentioned-

    1-It's $2M/year

    2-I don't remember him missing a game for us.

    3-I assume they tried to address the shins, unless you think the RS are complete idiots.  I'm not sure there is a magic wand for stress-induced micro-fractures.

    4-What's the alternative to $2M/year?  He's Cuban.  He's not coming to Boston because we're the 'good guys'.  He's coming for the money.

    5-He's followed the same path as 10,000 before him.  He worked his way up from the minors, struggled to establish himself, and then settled in.

    6-He helped us win a pennant, and when one of SPs got injured, we traded him because we felt we had a surplus at SS.

    There's really nothing here.  This happens 10x every single year.  Good prospect for needed veteran.



    There were problems in the minor leagues with him. After he got to Detroit, his teammates weren't happy with his attitude. He probably wasn't happy with them as well. Granted, I'm guessing at the one, but it usually works both ways. His role in the playoffs helped us win, which still gives him a ring after the championship. That might have made the situation even more negative for him there.

    I would bet anyone here he is NOT the future for the Tigers at SS.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from kimsaysthis. Show kimsaysthis's posts

    Re: Inglesias

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:

    I can be your hero baby...I can take away the pain.

    I will stand by you forever...you an take my breath away.



    LOL! Good one.

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

    Re: Inglesias

    In response to BostonTrollSpanker's comment:

    Kim what bugs some of us is that the Sox have a tendency to prize offensive production out of shortstop even as the semi-post-PED era has reduced offense in general and out of that position specifically. Those of us who value a great defensive shortstop get a bit frustrated that since Cabrera, who won us a World series way back when, we've been in constant pursuit of offensive production at that position, sometimes to the detriment of the team. 

    With the Iggy trade, I think it's unfair to call it a good or bad trade - yet. We have to see how it plays out over the next couple of years. 

    I think in the end it will end up being pretty neutral - by that I mean both teams will be able to point to benefits. 

    Peavy could have sealed the deal on this trade, but he really wasn't that great in the postseason. Iggy, on the other hand, made a surprise impact on the trade with critical errors that helped us to win the ALCS and get a ring. 

    Bottom line is when we made the trade we weren't sure if Buch could be healthy or not. It's hard to be overly critical of the trade given we got a ring out of it that Iggy in his own way helped us to get. 

    I'll save judgement for now, but in the end it will be either a good, decent, or neutral trade in my opinion. Depends a lot on how we do at shortstop going forward, if Iggy ends up being an everyday player and so on. 



    I also value defense over offense -- espcially, when we're talking about SS, RF and catcher. See my post to Joe for my comments on Iggy. It has nothing to do with offense or defense.

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

    Re: Inglesias

    In response to RedSoxKimmi's comment:

    In response to BostonTrollSpanker's comment:

    With the Iggy trade, I think it's unfair to call it a good or bad trade - yet. We have to see how it plays out over the next couple of years. 




    I disagree that we have to see how it plays out over the next several years.  The ultimate goal for making any moves is to win a World Series Championship.  Trading Iglesias for Peavy, along with several other moves and factors, led the Sox to the championship.  That alone, IMO, makes it a good move regardless of what Iggy or the Red Sox do during the remainder of Iggy's career.  Never mind that Iggy was dispensable and that the Sox needed more pitching, and that they need Peavy this year with Dempster's retirement.

     



    This is absolutely true.

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

    Re: Inglesias

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

    This whole topic has become tiresome. It is my feeling that it was not a good trade. I think Iglesias can and will become an outstanding shortstop for years to come. I think Peavy's best days are behind him. I do not think he was pivotal to winning a championship last year. I do hope that he stays healthy and helps us this year. Obviously, others feel differently about the trade. It is high time to end these discussions.



    Like I said to Joe, I would bet anyone here Iggy is not the future at SS for the Tigers.

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

    Re: Inglesias

    Was Iggy the first player to flub plays in a costly series that wouldn't lose him a ring either way? Was Iggy on a team where players didn't like him, and one can assume that he didn't like them? Does Iggy have a history of throwing a fit when he's sad or upset? Are posters continuing to call this a bad trade? At least surprised at how "easy" they gave up their future SS?

    I think it was not only an easy decision, but it was an easy decision no matter who was involved in this trade. Like I've said, Iggy will not be the future SS for the Tigers. Whether he comes back to play for awhile or not, he's not the future. It may just be trade bait.

     

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

    Re: Inglesias

    In response to BostonTrollSpanker's comment:

    Kim what bugs some of us is that the Sox have a tendency to prize offensive production out of shortstop even as the semi-post-PED era has reduced offense in general and out of that position specifically. Those of us who value a great defensive shortstop get a bit frustrated that since Cabrera, who won us a World series way back when, we've been in constant pursuit of offensive production at that position, sometimes to the detriment of the team. 

    With the Iggy trade, I think it's unfair to call it a good or bad trade - yet. We have to see how it plays out over the next couple of years. 

    I think in the end it will end up being pretty neutral - by that I mean both teams will be able to point to benefits. 

    Peavy could have sealed the deal on this trade, but he really wasn't that great in the postseason. Iggy, on the other hand, made a surprise impact on the trade with critical errors that helped us to win the ALCS and get a ring. 

    Bottom line is when we made the trade we weren't sure if Buch could be healthy or not. It's hard to be overly critical of the trade given we got a ring out of it that Iggy in his own way helped us to get. 

    I'll save judgement for now, but in the end it will be either a good, decent, or neutral trade in my opinion. Depends a lot on how we do at shortstop going forward, if Iggy ends up being an everyday player and so on. 



    In the end, If iglesias ideed does become a perenial Gold Glove SS in the mold of Omar Vizquel and plays to an Allstar level for a decade. This deal ultimatley will be judged based how well Bogaerts fares in comparison to Iglesias. Who surpassed Iglesias on the organizational depth chart two years ago. 

    There's no need to revisit the reasons for the acquisition of Peavy, lost on most is that they also acquired him to bolster the 2014 rotation too. If we're to believe you can't have too much pitching. Heading into the 2014 season, dispite the loss of Dempster the Sox have the organizational depth to compete for the division.

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

    Re: Inglesias

    After time goes by, and it will, there will be alot of players who replace Inglesias on any organizational chart, on alot of teams. He's using up his best years with nonsense IMO, and that's a shame. Too much, too soon.

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

    Re: Inglesias

    Maybe the Tigers are biding their time, and getting rid of anyone that annoys him. Far-fetched, but who knows? Anyway you look at it, it's not good.

    It seems to me the players weren't happy with his over-the-top antics on every play, even when unnecessary. So, he probably decided I'm not going to go over-the-top, or even all out to make a play. "See? That's what you get." I believe that message may have been received.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share