Red Sox Do Not Award Starting Roster Spots Based on Merit

  1. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Red Sox Do Not Award Starting Roster Spots Based on Merit

    Another day another thread of softlaw vitriol. Yawn.

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

    Re: Red Sox Do Not Award Starting Roster Spots Based on Merit

    The OP is an impressively long one.  There are a lot of words there.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from stillallbost08. Show stillallbost08's posts

    Re: Red Sox Do Not Award Starting Roster Spots Based on Merit

    In response to SpacemanEephus' comment:

    The OP is an impressively long one.  There are a lot of words there.




    I only read the 1st word

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

    Re: Red Sox Do Not Award Starting Roster Spots Based on Merit

    Gee Softy I never heard it that way before.  I mean your last 295,901 posts about JBJ really have had nothing to do with what you are now talking about.  You bring up some great points, and different angles that we need to consider.

    So thank you for making it perfectly clear to me now.  Here I was thinking that maybe the Sox were taking ST stats with a grain of salt and want to see more of him in Pawtucket before deeming him MLB ready.  But obviously I was actually thinking it was about money.  

    I do not own my own thoughts.  Softy knows my own and the Sox reasoning better than we do. 

     
  6. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Red Sox Do Not Award Starting Roster Spots Based on Merit

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

    You'll soon see how meaningless minor league stats are, and how those spring trainings stats meant something, once managmenet calls Bradley up during the full flow of the minor league season.

    But, it's not about the money 7 years from now, it's about a few more weeks of minor league baseball to convince managment that Bradley is ready for MLB. They are sure that Drew is ready for MLB, not that any other team wanted the bum.



    Ummmm. Drew had other offers.  And I'm pretty confident Bradley will be a very productive hitter at some point this season.  That doesn't mean he doesn't have more growth up the learning curve and seasoning.  Minor leagues are by no means useless, and spring training stats aren't useless.....but they are pretty close to that.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from tom-uk. Show tom-uk's posts

    Re: Red Sox Do Not Award Starting Roster Spots Based on Merit

     
  9. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Red Sox Do Not Award Starting Roster Spots Based on Merit

    It's interesting that softy is now driving the Jackie Bradley Jr. bandwagon when he told me last spring I was pipe dreaming when I mentioned JBJ in a thread where we were discussing minor leaguers. Any excuse to bash the Red Sox I guess...

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from bald-predictions. Show bald-predictions's posts

    Re: Red Sox Do Not Award Starting Roster Spots Based on Merit

    In response to ConanObrien's comment:

    more useless drivel



    If the truth is useless, then I guess so.

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

    Re: Red Sox Do Not Award Starting Roster Spots Based on Merit

    I see a certain hypocrisy regarding spring training stats of various players. It seems they are "meaningless" when it supports  one's opinion , but on the other hand , are " meaningful " when it suits our purpose.  Which one is it  folks. You can't have it both ways.  Or can you?

     
  13. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Red Sox Do Not Award Starting Roster Spots Based on Merit

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

    I see a certain hypocrisy regarding spring training stats of various players. It seems they are "meaningless" when it supports  one's opinion , but on the other hand , are " meaningful " when it suits our purpose.  Which one is it  folks. You can't have it both ways.  Or can you?



    Be specific Mr. Galehouse.  Which spring stats have been cited as 'meaningful' and by who?

     
  15. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Red Sox Do Not Award Starting Roster Spots Based on Merit

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

    Ummmm. Drew had other offers.

    Who made them, and for how much?

    And I'm pretty confident Bradley will be a very productive hitter at some point this season.  That doesn't mean he doesn't have more growth up the learning curve and seasoning.  Minor leagues are by no means useless, and spring training stats aren't useless.....but they are pretty close to that.

    If spring training stats are "pretty close to useless", and minor leagues are by no mean useless", since you've been whining about Bradley's AA stats and no AAA ball and needs more gowth up the learning and seasoning, how on earth can you be so stupid as to say "I'm pretty confident Bradley will be a very productive hitters at some point this season".

    You make about as much sense as Red Sox management, which has been horrific for a half a decade.




    I don't need to call people stupid to make a point.  You obviously make no attempt to have a civil conversation with someone, and fail to see their points.  

    Yes Softy THERE IS NO REASON to ever have confidence in players based on their skill level and talent. I mean why do we even have a draft???? Seriously if we can't project what players can do in the future why even bother having the worst team pick first???

    Like i said I don't talk to people who need to insult to make a point.  So I'm going to ignore you for a while

    Now go in the corner and think about what you've done. 

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

    Re: Red Sox Do Not Award Starting Roster Spots Based on Merit

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

     

    I see a certain hypocrisy regarding spring training stats of various players. It seems they are "meaningless" when it supports  one's opinion , but on the other hand , are " meaningful " when it suits our purpose.  Which one is it  folks. You can't have it both ways.  Or can you?

     



    Be specific Mr. Galehouse.  Which spring stats have been cited as 'meaningful' and by who?

     




    I suspect he confused "meaningful" with "encouraging.

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

    Re: Red Sox Do Not Award Starting Roster Spots Based on Merit

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

    It's based on current contracts, most of which are big value blunders. It doesn't do any good to pretend that current guaranteed contract mistakes should serve as the basis to award starting roster spots.

    It's official, Bradley will head to the minors. I don't want the Red Sox to bring him up at all in 2013, as Gomes and Ellsbury and Shane and Nava and Sweeney and Carp will be the opeining day lineup. If that's the case, Red Sox managment has no business pretending that these roster decisions need change during the season for any reason but the true disabled list for Ellsbury, Gomes or Shane.

    There is no reason to try and exploit Bradley and compromise wins for pennies in 7 years, just to save face for fans and management.

    Bradley should not be used at all in 2013, other than starter long term DL. And nothing is gained by putting him out there when the Red Sox go into minor league exhibition mode in the last half of the season.

    Wait until 2014, and if they don't keep Bradley in the minors to start the 2014 season and "save a year of control" before calling him up for the 2014 season, then they have no business starting him in the minors for 2013.

    Folks, this is an embarrassing and tired old act that this managment keeps repeating.

    And I'm the first to call Cherry a liar, when he never mentioned the fact that the only reason they Bradley is going to the minors is becuase of this silly "same a year of control" nonsense. It will be proven once they call Bradley up while the minor league season is still in full swing.  The man has the audacity to claim that his best team for opening day includes Gomes, Ellsbury, Shane, and Nava and or Carp and/or Sweeney.

    The Red Sox are making it clear that politics trumps competition for roster spots. Anyone remember Wakefield's gifted personal roster active roster spot? Of course you do.

    The Red Sox need to change the way they do business, and the last 4 years makes that perfectly clear. This move is just one of many that shows that this management is wasting 40 million here and then making roster decisions to claim that "it won't affect early games" and "we're likely to save 10 to 20M 7 years from now".

    Anyone else tired of this losing brand that managment is responisble for?

    Anyone else tired of the way they are making decisions on roster members and contracts?

    Anyone else tired of the lack of candor when responsding to criticisms of these decisions?

    Watch and see when the 10M S. Drew comes off the DL. No matter how well Iggy is playing, and he's played well as a SS this spring, I guarantee you that S. Drew will be gifted the starting SS slot as soon as he comes off the DL.

    And watch and see how long Gomes and Nava and/or Sweeney and/or Carp lasts in LF. Once management sees that ticket sales and attendance (no sale of overpriced goods at Fenway) start to drop off from watching this garbage, they'll call up Bradley and put him in the very place or places they claimed they sent him to the minors to make sure he didn't go to the places. And that will be in a "off the bench role" and/or one of the corner OF slots.

    Other than myself and Geo and a few others, who else is tired of this incompetent management approach?

    DAD & BILL-806 sadly CONCUR with Mr. SOFTLAW   !!!


     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from ANONMD08. Show ANONMD08's posts

    Re: Red Sox Do Not Award Starting Roster Spots Based on Merit

    I think what will happen with JBJ is the same thing that happened to Middlebrooks last year. As soon as the trade deadline gets close and Ellsbury is on his way out or maybe just maybe one the other outfielders ends up on the DL, we know it will happen. JBJ will be up with the big club getting his playing time. 

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

    Re: Red Sox Do Not Award Starting Roster Spots Based on Merit

    softy himself thinks even one outting by Dempster in ST was meaningful enough to start a thread on.

    That's the perspective we need to understand with someone who once made a definitive judgement about a player based on one pitch. Talk about small sample sizes.

     
  21. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Red Sox Do Not Award Starting Roster Spots Based on Merit

    m

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

    Re: Red Sox Do Not Award Starting Roster Spots Based on Merit

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

    Like i said I don't talk to people who need to insult to make a point.  So I'm going to ignore you for a while

    Now go in the corner and think about what you've done. 

    You have no response to your comment "I'm confident based on his talent but not until he plays more minor league ball".

    Your insults come from your patronizing comments, which are empty of any merit. Bradley's no more going to be ready after more minor league ball than he would be if he used his talent to start in LF, right now.



    I've answered that question a dozen times and backed up my points.  It's not my fault you are completely unable to see anything, point, argument, side to a story that has ever existed in the universe that doesn't exist inside your own mind. 

     
  24. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Red Sox Do Not Award Starting Roster Spots Based on Merit

    Its hard to take an educated guess without reading it or even taking a close look at it, but the OP really seems to have a whole lot of words.  Anyone else as impressed as I am with the sheer amount of words?

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share