No team has Ellsbury as their "#1 priority"

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

    Re: No team has Ellsbury as their

    In response to BosoxJoe5's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to mikeysmantle's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Choices:

    1. Ellsbury + 100 million plus

    2. Bradley + Corey Hart or Rajia Davis and a few million + Draft Pick

     

    Ellsbury will not be back with the Red Sox. Does anyone who chooses #1 need a prescription for Crawford's disease? 

    [/QUOTE]

    The problem is Bradley is clearly not ready so you would need someone better than Davis while Bradley starts in AAA. Ellsbury is by far the hardest of the FA to replace because they don't have anyone ready. At least with catcher you can find out wha you really have with Lavarnway.

    [/QUOTE]

    Why?  He hit .842 at AAA last year.  He had a .695 OPS when he returned in September.  Steamer projects him for ~ .740 next year.

     
  2. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: No team has Ellsbury as their

     I would say that Crawford could not play in Boston, where Ellsbury proved he can, 6-$100-$105 mil the max if not, see ya.  IMO 

    Unless he came at a significant hometown discount, I'd move on.  I really don't want to pay a position player past the age of about 34.  I'd feel a little different where we have a complete hole, but I think one of the most important strategies in BB is to be able to manage your succession strategy.

    With Naps and Salty, we have to at least listen.  With Drew and Ells, I'd save the money, get younger, and spend the savings elsewhere.

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

    Re: No team has Ellsbury as their

    Crawford cannot play in LA either, look at his 2013 numbers. 

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

    Re: No team has Ellsbury as their

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     I would say that Crawford could not play in Boston, where Ellsbury proved he can, 6-$100-$105 mil the max if not, see ya.  IMO 

    Unless he came at a significant hometown discount, I'd move on.  I really don't want to pay a position player past the age of about 34.  I'd feel a little different where we have a complete hole, but I think one of the most important strategies in BB is to be able to manage your succession strategy.

    With Naps and Salty, we have to at least listen.  With Drew and Ells, I'd save the money, get younger, and spend the savings elsewhere.

    [/QUOTE]

    Well said, Joe.

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

    Re: No team has Ellsbury as their

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     I would say that Crawford could not play in Boston, where Ellsbury proved he can, 6-$100-$105 mil the max if not, see ya.  IMO 

    Unless he came at a significant hometown discount, I'd move on.  I really don't want to pay a position player past the age of about 34.  I'd feel a little different where we have a complete hole, but I think one of the most important strategies in BB is to be able to manage your succession strategy.

    With Naps and Salty, we have to at least listen.  With Drew and Ells, I'd save the money, get younger, and spend the savings elsewhere.

    [/QUOTE]


    Save the money on centerfield and shortstop, and spend the money elsewhere ?  Where ? I would say that centerfield and shortstop are vital positions. Bradley and Bogaerts are first rate prospects, but they can also play different positions.

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

    Re: No team has Ellsbury as their

    Save the money on centerfield and shortstop, and spend the money elsewhere ?  Where ? I would say that centerfield and shortstop are vital positions. Bradley and Bogaerts are first rate prospects, but they can also play different positions.

    Let's say we can only spend on 2 positions. That means the other 2 are left to prospects or in-house solutions.

    Yes, in a vacumn we should strive to strenghten ourselves up the middle as opposed to 1B and C, but when you look at what we have in place already, it seems that Catcher is our worst in-house position with 1F and CF both ahead of SS.

    4. Cathcer: Ross, Butler, Vazquez

    3. 1B: Carp, Nava (maybe Middy) and Papi at NL parks

    2. CF: JBJ (Victorino with Nava in RF) and Kalish

    1. SS: Bogey

     

    Now, I get your point about moving Bogey to 3B and maybe between Middy, Carp and Nava we can come close to giving us what Napoli did in 2013 at 1B, so getting a SS could also solve our 1B issue, but we'd still need a catcher and CF'er. 

    We can't get all 3 with just $26M to spend (assuming Bailey is tendered & gets $4M).

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

    Re: No team has Ellsbury as their

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     I would say that Crawford could not play in Boston, where Ellsbury proved he can, 6-$100-$105 mil the max if not, see ya.  IMO 

    Unless he came at a significant hometown discount, I'd move on.  I really don't want to pay a position player past the age of about 34.  I'd feel a little different where we have a complete hole, but I think one of the most important strategies in BB is to be able to manage your succession strategy.

    With Naps and Salty, we have to at least listen.  With Drew and Ells, I'd save the money, get younger, and spend the savings elsewhere.

    [/QUOTE]


    Save the money on centerfield and shortstop, and spend the money elsewhere ?  Where ? I would say that centerfield and shortstop are vital positions. Bradley and Bogaerts are first rate prospects, but they can also play different positions.

    [/QUOTE]

    Anyone can play a different position, but you don't typically move guys with a glove to a less-demanding position.  It cheapens their value.

    And, if we move Bogaerts to 3B, what do we do with WMB?

    And Bradley is a defense-first CF.  A move to LF guts his value.  At that point, he is no better than Gomes.  In that case, you might as well trade him.

    As far as spending the money, we still need a 1B and catcher, and it would be nice to be able to have money in the bank at the trading deadline, just in case someone goes down.

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

    Re: No team has Ellsbury as their

    ESPN columnist Jayson Stark tweets that "... clubs are reporting Ellsbury talks are moving faster than expected. Winter-mettings deal not impossible."

    https://twitter.com/jaysonst/status/407624437513474049

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

    Re: No team has Ellsbury as their

    Anyone can play a different position, but you don't typically move guys with a glove to a less-demanding position.  It cheapens their value.

    And, if we move Bogaerts to 3B, what do we do with WMB?

    Umm, we happen to have a huge hole at 1B, and if you like Carp, Middy would be a nice platoon with him.

     

    And Bradley is a defense-first CF.  A move to LF guts his value.  At that point, he is no better than Gomes.  In that case, you might as well trade him.

    Bradley will not be moved from CF.

     

    As far as spending the money, we still need a 1B and catcher, and it would be nice to be able to have money in the bank at the trading deadline, just in case someone goes down.

    Trade Dempster. Eat $3M of his deal and save $10M.

    Sign or trade for a great glove SS for cheap.

    Move Bogey to 3B.

    Platoon Middy at 1B with Carp, and he can get more PAs at 3B when the SS and Bogey need rest, or at 1B if carp plays some LF.

    Use all the remaining money to upgrade the OF, pen and catching positions.

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

    Re: No team has Ellsbury as their

    In response to hill55's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    ESPN columnist Jayson Stark tweets that "... clubs are reporting Ellsbury talks are moving faster than expected. Winter-mettings deal not impossible."

    https://twitter.com/jaysonst/status/407624437513474049

    [/QUOTE]

    Hill . You have been someone who has consistly posted stats trying to show Ellsbury in a negative light(misssed games through injury as an example )

    Its ironic he may soon sign for your team

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from jasko2248. Show jasko2248's posts

    Re: No team has Ellsbury as their

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Anyone can play a different position, but you don't typically move guys with a glove to a less-demanding position.  It cheapens their value.

    And, if we move Bogaerts to 3B, what do we do with WMB?

    Umm, we happen to have a huge hole at 1B, and if you like Carp, Middy would be a nice platoon with him.

     

    And Bradley is a defense-first CF.  A move to LF guts his value.  At that point, he is no better than Gomes.  In that case, you might as well trade him.

    Bradley will not be moved from CF.

     

    As far as spending the money, we still need a 1B and catcher, and it would be nice to be able to have money in the bank at the trading deadline, just in case someone goes down.

    Trade Dempster. Eat $3M of his deal and save $10M.

    Sign or trade for a great glove SS for cheap.

    Move Bogey to 3B.

    Platoon Middy at 1B with Carp, and he can get more PAs at 3B when the SS and Bogey need rest, or at 1B if carp plays some LF.

    Use all the remaining money to upgrade the OF, pen and catching positions.

    [/QUOTE]

    Moon, there is no way they are going to "platoon" Middlebrooks at this point in his career, especially at a position he's hasn't played before.  The kid either plays every day, goes to Pawtucket or they trade him.  You don't develop young players by platooning them at the Big League level.  There is literally no chance of this happening.  

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

    Re: No team has Ellsbury as their

    In response to oscars' comment:

    In response to hill55's comment:

    ESPN columnist Jayson Stark tweets that "... clubs are reporting Ellsbury talks are moving faster than expected. Winter-mettings deal not impossible."

    https://twitter.com/jaysonst/status/407624437513474049

    Hill . You have been someone who has consistly posted stats trying to show Ellsbury in a negative light(misssed games through injury as an example )

    Its ironic he may soon sign for your team

    I certainly hope the Seattle Mariners do not sign Jacoby Ellsbury to an expensive, long-term contract, but I would note that since 2007 I have posted stats that place Ellsbury in a positive light and a neutral light as well as in a negative light.

    Going forward, I wish Jacoby Ellsbury a successful career somewhere other than Seattle.

     
  14. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: No team has Ellsbury as their

    In response to jasko2248's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Anyone can play a different position, but you don't typically move guys with a glove to a less-demanding position.  It cheapens their value.

    And, if we move Bogaerts to 3B, what do we do with WMB?

    Umm, we happen to have a huge hole at 1B, and if you like Carp, Middy would be a nice platoon with him.

     

    And Bradley is a defense-first CF.  A move to LF guts his value.  At that point, he is no better than Gomes.  In that case, you might as well trade him.

    Bradley will not be moved from CF.

     

    As far as spending the money, we still need a 1B and catcher, and it would be nice to be able to have money in the bank at the trading deadline, just in case someone goes down.

    Trade Dempster. Eat $3M of his deal and save $10M.

    Sign or trade for a great glove SS for cheap.

    Move Bogey to 3B.

    Platoon Middy at 1B with Carp, and he can get more PAs at 3B when the SS and Bogey need rest, or at 1B if carp plays some LF.

    Use all the remaining money to upgrade the OF, pen and catching positions.

    [/QUOTE]

    Moon, there is no way they are going to "platoon" Middlebrooks at this point in his career, especially at a position he's hasn't played before.  The kid either plays every day, goes to Pawtucket or they trade him.  You don't develop young players by platooning them at the Big League level.  There is literally no chance of this happening.  

    [/QUOTE]

    I have said numerous times I do not think this will happen.

    I'm not a big Middy fan, so to me, platooning him vs LHPs is about what he has earned. If he proves he is better, then Carp can get squeezed out of a job.

    I have also mentioned the main reason I like this plan is that we improve our defense at SS, move Bogey to the position he belongs sooner rather than later, and solve the 1B problem for no added cost.

    We might as well get Bogey learning his true position as soon as possible.

    Plenty of young players are developed through a platoon, but in this case I could see Middy getting these PAs:

    1B: 350 (250 vs LHPs and 100 vs RHPs)

    3B: 150vs RHPs as Bogey rests or plays SS as the new SS rests.

    That's about 500 PAs. It could be more if our SS, 3Bman, 1Bman or Papi get hurt. Even if an OF'er gets hurt, Carp could move to LF and Middy plays FT at 1B.

    Middy can get plenty of PAs, if he plays well enough to earn them. If he's as good as you think, he should have no problem ousting Carp out of all his 1B PAs.

     

    Again, I give this plan close to zero percent chance of happening. When Iggy was traded, the fate was sealed: Bogey is our 2014 SS, and Middy will be our 2014 3Bman. This doesn't stop me from voicing my opinions and suggesting what I think might work. I am basing my plan on the idea that we will not go over the luxury limit, and we only have about $26M to spend on too many holes. Getting a cheap defensive whiz at SS, solves the 1B problem, leaving the money for the other slots.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from jasko2248. Show jasko2248's posts

    Re: No team has Ellsbury as their

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to jasko2248's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Anyone can play a different position, but you don't typically move guys with a glove to a less-demanding position.  It cheapens their value.

    And, if we move Bogaerts to 3B, what do we do with WMB?

    Umm, we happen to have a huge hole at 1B, and if you like Carp, Middy would be a nice platoon with him.

     

    And Bradley is a defense-first CF.  A move to LF guts his value.  At that point, he is no better than Gomes.  In that case, you might as well trade him.

    Bradley will not be moved from CF.

     

    As far as spending the money, we still need a 1B and catcher, and it would be nice to be able to have money in the bank at the trading deadline, just in case someone goes down.

    Trade Dempster. Eat $3M of his deal and save $10M.

    Sign or trade for a great glove SS for cheap.

    Move Bogey to 3B.

    Platoon Middy at 1B with Carp, and he can get more PAs at 3B when the SS and Bogey need rest, or at 1B if carp plays some LF.

    Use all the remaining money to upgrade the OF, pen and catching positions.

    [/QUOTE]

    Moon, there is no way they are going to "platoon" Middlebrooks at this point in his career, especially at a position he's hasn't played before.  The kid either plays every day, goes to Pawtucket or they trade him.  You don't develop young players by platooning them at the Big League level.  There is literally no chance of this happening.  

    [/QUOTE]

    I have said numerous times I do not think this will happen.

    I'm not a big Middy fan, so to me, platooning him vs LHPs is about what he has earned. If he proves he is better, then Carp can get squeezed out of a job.

    I have also mentioned the main reason I like this plan is that we improve our defense at SS, move Bogey to the position he belongs sooner rather than later, and solve the 1B problem for no added cost.

    We might as well get Bogey learning his true position as soon as possible.

    Plenty of young players are developed through a platoon, but in this case I could see Middy getting these PAs:

    1B: 350 (250 vs LHPs and 100 vs RHPs)

    3B: 150vs RHPs as Bogey rests or plays SS as the new SS rests.

    That's about 500 PAs. It could be more if our SS, 3Bman, 1Bman or Papi get hurt. Even if an OF'er gets hurt, Carp could move to LF and Middy plays FT at 1B.

    Middy can get plenty of PAs, if he plays well enough to earn them. If he's as good as you think, he should have no problem ousting Carp out of all his 1B PAs.

     

    Again, I give this plan close to zero percent chance of happening. When Iggy was traded, the fate was sealed: Bogey is our 2014 SS, and Middy will be our 2014 3Bman. This doesn't stop me from voicing my opinions and suggesting what I think might work. I am basing my plan on the idea that we will not go over the luxury limit, and we only have about $26M to spend on too many holes. Getting a cheap defensive whiz at SS, solves the 1B problem, leaving the money for the other slots.

    [/QUOTE]

    Ok, fair enough.  Maybe it's just me, but I just don't see the point of posting something over and over again that has zero chance of ever happening.  By the way, Boegarts has been a shortstop his entire life, so it's pretty safe to say that SS is his "true" position at this point. You're in the minority as far as people thinking he can stick there, but keep posting the "musical chairs" infield theory, and again, there is no chance of this happening.  If you are going to create a "realistic" thread, shouldn't you try to post things that have at least a "chance" of being "somewhat realistic?"

     

     

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

    Re: No team has Ellsbury as their

    Ok, fair enough.  Maybe it's just me, but I just don't see the point of posting something over and over again that has zero chance of ever happening.  

    It's just one possible solution to the contract crunch. I post it, because I like it. However, I am not trying to imply I am smarter than Ben or that Ben is not a good GM, because he does not agree with me.

     

    By the way, Boegarts has been a shortstop his entire life, so it's pretty safe to say that SS is his "true" position at this point.

    Many players come up as a SS and end up at 2B, 3B or elsewhere.

     

    You're in the minority as far as people thinking he can stick there, but keep posting the "musical chairs" infield theory, and again, there is no chance of this happening.  

    Virtually every scouting report I have read on Bogey mentions him moving to another position to some extent. Usually when you read that, it is code for saying he is not a plus or may never be a plus defender at his current defender.

    Maybe I am in a minority on this board, but almost all the reports I have read have at least paid hommage to the idea of moving him, so I wouldn't say I am all by myself out here. Also, Middy's defensive struggles in 2013 is also a factor in suggesting this plan. An average 3Bman can often become a plus 1Bman is a short time.

    If you are going to create a "realistic" thread, shouldn't you try to post things that have at least a "chance" of being "somewhat realistic?"

    This isn't the "realistic thread", but I do think my plan will happen someday, just not 2014. I have mentioned this plan on my thread, because I do think the idea has merit, I just do not think Ben is looking at this option to start 2014. I honestly think Bogey will be at another position by 2016, or he will still be a below average fielding SS that will most likely more than make up for that deficiency by being a big offensive plus. However, he'd be a big offensive plus at 3b as well, and the disparity between the average offense from the SS position and 3B position has been narrowing over the decades, so the positional advantage of having a big O guy at SS is diminishing over this era.

    I also remember many poster criticizing me last winter for suggesting we start giving Bogey time at 3B in AAA this year. As it turned out, he was forced to learn it at the MLB level in the midst of a playoff run. My guess is, you'd have told me what you are telling me now last winter, and look what happened.

    What if Middy struggles mightily again to start 2014? It may be easier to find a cheap SS than a decent 3bman. What if we decide to go with Carp and Nava at 1B, and they stink or get hurt? Is it totally inconceivable to you that we do musical chaors again in 2014? For the love of God, we moved one of the best fielding SSs I have ever seen to 3B (Iggy), so I don't think it is totally outlandish to think Bogey could end up at 3B this year. I seriously doubt it is Ben's winter plan, but it is not a complete zero percent chance.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from jasko2248. Show jasko2248's posts

    Re: No team has Ellsbury as their

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    Ok, fair enough.  Maybe it's just me, but I just don't see the point of posting something over and over again that has zero chance of ever happening.  

    It's just one possible solution to the contract crunch. I post it, because I like it. However, I am not trying to imply I am smarter than Ben or that Ben is not a good GM, because he does not agree with me.

     

    By the way, Boegarts has been a shortstop his entire life, so it's pretty safe to say that SS is his "true" position at this point.

    Many players come up as a SS and end up at 2B, 3B or elsewhere.

     

    You're in the minority as far as people thinking he can stick there, but keep posting the "musical chairs" infield theory, and again, there is no chance of this happening.  

    Virtually every scouting report I have read on Bogey mentions him moving to another position to some extent. Usually when you read that, it is code for saying he is not a plus or may never be a plus defender at his current defender.

    Maybe I am in a minority on this board, but almost all the reports I have read have at least paid hommage to the idea of moving him, so I wouldn't say I am all by myself out here. Also, Middy's defensive struggles in 2013 is also a factor in suggesting this plan. An average 3Bman can often become a plus 1Bman is a short time.

    If you are going to create a "realistic" thread, shouldn't you try to post things that have at least a "chance" of being "somewhat realistic?"

    This isn't the "realistic thread", but I do think my plan will happen someday, just not 2014. I have mentioned this plan on my thread, because I do think the idea has merit, I just do not think Ben is looking at this option to start 2014. I honestly think Bogey will be at another position by 2016, or he will still be a below average fielding SS that will most likely more than make up for that deficiency by being a big offensive plus. However, he'd be a big offensive plus at 3b as well, and the disparity between the average offense from the SS position and 3B position has been narrowing over the decades, so the positional advantage of having a big O guy at SS is diminishing over this era.

    I also remember many poster criticizing me last winter for suggesting we start giving Bogey time at 3B in AAA this year. As it turned out, he was forced to learn it at the MLB level in the midst of a playoff run. My guess is, you'd have told me what you are telling me now last winter, and look what happened.

    What if Middy struggles mightily again to start 2014? It may be easier to find a cheap SS than a decent 3bman. What if we decide to go with Carp and Nava at 1B, and they stink or get hurt? Is it totally inconceivable to you that we do musical chaors again in 2014? For the love of God, we moved one of the best fielding SSs I have ever seen to 3B (Iggy), so I don't think it is totally outlandish to think Bogey could end up at 3B this year. I seriously doubt it is Ben's winter plan, but it is not a complete zero percent chance.

     



    I don't think you understood my post.  I never said that there was a zero chance of Bogaerts ever playing 3rd, or even playing there this year.  I said there was "zero chance" that they "platoon Middlebrooks" or implement a "musical chairs infield."  They would never even consider it to start the season, but if a bunch of guys get hurt or slump miserably, then you obviously have to adjust on the fly, as they did last year.

     To say that "Middlebrooks platooning against lefties at 1st is about what he has earned at this point" is comical.  Just because "you" have never been high on him, you think that the organization should hinder his development.  That's "realistic" to you?  You obviously value shortstops who can play defense, which I understand, but I can tell you for a fact that right handed power like Middlebrooks possesses is a lot more difficult to find these days than a great defensive SS.  Time will tell how his career plays out, but I'm pretty sure that he won't be a "platoon player" anytime soon.   

    You also didn't have Bogaerts in "your" top 4 Sox prospects going into last year, even though you would've been hard pressed to find a scout who didn't think he was the most talented player in the system by far.  I'm not saying Boegarts/Middlebrooks will be the SS/3B combination for the next decade, and there is a possibility that they both won't even be there to start the season, I'm just saying that they are two young talented players who won't be bouncing around the infield anytime soon, and barring injury, both will be starting somewhere and playing one position.

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

    Re: No team has Ellsbury as their

    I don't think you understood my post.  I never said that there was a zero chance of Bogaerts ever playing 3rd, or even playing there this year.  I said there was "zero chance" that they "platoon Middlebrooks" or implement a "musical chairs infield."  They would never even consider it to start the season, but if a bunch of guys get hurt or slump miserably, then you obviously have to adjust on the fly, as they did last year.

    Sorry for the misunderstanding.

    I agree the chance is close to zero Bogey starts at 3B and Middy at 1B with everyone healthy.

     

     To say that "Middlebrooks platooning against lefties at 1st is about what he has earned at this point" is comical.  Just because "you" have never been high on him, you think that the organization should hinder his development.  That's "realistic" to you?  You obviously value shortstops who can play defense, which I understand, but I can tell you for a fact that right handed power like Middlebrooks possesses is a lot more difficult to find these days than a great defensive SS.  Time will tell how his career plays out, but I'm pretty sure that he won't be a "platoon player" anytime soon.   

    The guy was demoted twice in 2013 by Farrell & Ben. How is it comical to suggest a platoon at 1b with extra PAs vs RHPs coming from 3b (when Bogey rests and covers SS), SS (see Bogey at 3B), LF (Carp in LF), RF (Nava in RF/Carp in LF) and DH (Papi rest or injury)?

    I'm thinking he could end up with 500 PAs under my suggested plan. That's more than he got in 2013.

     

    You also didn't have Bogaerts in "your" top 4 Sox prospects going into last year, even though you would've been hard pressed to find a scout who didn't think he was the most talented player in the system by far.  

    That's absurd. I  viewed Bogey as a top 2 prospect  for over 2 years.

     

    I'm not saying Boegarts/Middlebrooks will be the SS/3B combination for the next decade, and there is a possibility that they both won't even be there to start the season, I'm just saying that they are two young talented players who won't be bouncing around the infield anytime soon, and barring injury, both will be starting somewhere and playing one position.

    They bounced around in 2013. How soon is that?

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: No team has Ellsbury as their

    starting to make sense for detroit now. Imagine if they got Ells...They NEED a LO hitter, dont have Fisters, Fielder and peraltas money anymore...

    Peter Gammons         @pgammo Follow

    Sans Fister, Fielder, Peralta, Tigers can afford Jacoby Ellsbury. Bosox told he's closer to $140M than their $100M range

    5:03 AM - 3 Dec 2013

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: No team has Ellsbury as their

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    starting to make sense for detroit now. Imagine if they got Ells...They NEED a LO hitter, dont have Fisters, Fielder and peraltas money anymore...

    Peter Gammons         @pgammo Follow

    Sans Fister, Fielder, Peralta, Tigers can afford Jacoby Ellsbury. Bosox told he's closer to $140M than their $100M range

    5:03 AM - 3 Dec 2013



    I think the Tigers, Mariners and Dodgers might make a push for Ells.  The Dodgers need to dump a couple guys before hand but my guess is they might.

     

     
  22. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: No team has Ellsbury as their

    In response to southpaw777's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    starting to make sense for detroit now. Imagine if they got Ells...They NEED a LO hitter, dont have Fisters, Fielder and peraltas money anymore...

    Peter Gammons         @pgammo Follow

    Sans Fister, Fielder, Peralta, Tigers can afford Jacoby Ellsbury. Bosox told he's closer to $140M than their $100M range

    5:03 AM - 3 Dec 2013

    [/QUOTE]

    Johnny Damon 2.0, except instead of him going to the Yanks... he goes to the Tigers and they win.  I like what Detroit is doing this offseason a lot.  They are reforming the team based on how they were handled in the post season.  They had absolutely NO business losing in the playoffs with that rotation... the starters were historically good, but the team had glaring holes.  They are freeing up enough cash to make a big move, plus fill in the pieces while they wait to pony up for Sherzer and Miggy. 

    That said, with Miggy and Sherzer on the horizon... I think they are a long shot to sign a player who will command long years and big dollars unless they don't give a hoot about blowing up the salary cap for a handful of years.

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

    Re: No team has Ellsbury as their

    Well, so much for the credibility of this thread. Cashman lurking and then striking, as he has been known to do.

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

    Re: No team has Ellsbury as their

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Well, so much for the credibility of this thread. Cashman lurking and then striking, as he has been known to do.

    [/QUOTE]

    Yup, all we need a few days without hearing anything and posters come to the conclusion that our guys aren't getting offers.  Maybe I can go through and find the most ridiculous comments tomorrow, though Softlaw's comments are probably already deleted.

     

Share