RF should be Reddicks to lose

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from thee-yazzer. Show thee-yazzer's posts

    Re: RF should be Reddicks to lose

    right field is already lost, thanks to 'boy genius.'

    REDDICK in RF is a no-brainer.

    sit drew and cameron or put them on DFA(preferrably) what the hell, it's just another 21 million wasted dollars.
    almost exactly the amount wasted on crawford.

    please fire theo!
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: RF should be Reddicks to lose

    In Response to Re: RF should be Reddicks to lose:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: RF should be Reddicks to lose : There is what Frank McCourt wants (cheap enough to hold on to a team everyone but Frank knows he has lost) and what the baseball operations people want to see. MLB took control of those offices even while Frank stills legal owns the team specfically to ensure that baseball operations concerns were addressed and the team was not subject to short sighted fire sale. Kemp and Either are there middle of the order identity. Look for the Dodgers to trade out aging veteran pieces to get their salary relief IMO. As for Reddick, does it dawn on anybody that Francona is bringing a guy who was hitting .234 in AAA along with caution? While some may disagree with that tact, Terry actually has a pretty decent track record with the RS. The RS have the misfortune of having Crawford out at least until after the Houston series. That has allowed him time to give PT to multiple OFers and sort through just what he has. If reports are true, they are about to make a roster move with Cameron. All part of a sorting out process that required PT to determine what is up. It takes some actual data after all to make a team willing to eat a $7M or $14M deal. It is after all in their world a business where they are working with their money.
    Posted by fivekatz[/QUOTE]

    fivekatz, I hear you but just because a kid hit 234 at AAA has no bearing on what he has done in the bigs.  A lot of kids do this and go on to good major league careers.  Ellsbury would probably be more of a "red flag" because his agent is Boras.

    Kemp and Either, regardless of where they stand in the Dodger lineup are probably looked at as two of the more high priced obligations moving forward.  A lot of struggling teams say one thing and then do another thats the norm.

    Our managements hands are tied because I don't see Drew or Cam having much trade value.  In this case they either ride out their contracts in hopes they turn things around, or make a move that may hurt their wallet but save our season.  Its tough to swallow for any ownership but we have 21 plus mil tied up in three part time players who are doing very little to help our cause.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from maxbialystock. Show maxbialystock's posts

    Re: RF should be Reddicks to lose

    Of some interest:  today Reddick bats 6th against a pretty good lefty, Hamels.  Obviously, that's because Cameron is gone, but Francona could have put Drew in the lineup.  Anyway, here's Reddick's chance to show he can hit a very good lefty. 
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: RF should be Reddicks to lose

    In Response to Re: RF should be Reddicks to lose:
    [QUOTE]Of some interest:  today Reddick bats 6th against a pretty good lefty, Hamels.  Obviously, that's because Cameron is gone, but Francona could have put Drew in the lineup.  Anyway, here's Reddick's chance to show he can hit a very good lefty. 
    Posted by maxbialystock[/QUOTE]

    Exactly max, we already know what three other players have left to offer so give the kid a chance to prove himself.  At least then we know where to go next.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: RF should be Reddicks to lose

    Reddick is playing today like he knows a full time position could be his to win or lose.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from SpacemanEephus. Show SpacemanEephus's posts

    Re: RF should be Reddicks to lose

    In Response to Re: RF should be Reddicks to lose:
    [QUOTE]Reddick is playing today like he knows a full time position could be his to win or lose.
    Posted by craze4sox[/QUOTE]

    Craze, perhaps.  But, it seems to me this is how he has been playing since he came up ... each time.  The kid has been blowing away his productivity in Pawtucket ... in BOSTON!  Talk about siezing the opportunity.  I love this guy.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from georom4. Show georom4's posts

    Re: RF should be Reddicks to lose

    space, before we go nuts lets remember kalish last year - he was solid but not the answers to our prayers...i think i would still go with drew if he's heathy - no need to put this kid in the pressure cooker just yet
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: RF should be Reddicks to lose

    In Response to Re: RF should be Reddicks to lose:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: RF should be Reddicks to lose : Craze, perhaps.  But, it seems to me this is how he has been playing since he came up ... each time.  The kid has been blowing away his productivity in Pawtucket ... in BOSTON!  Talk about siezing the opportunity.  I love this guy.
    Posted by SpacemanEephus[/QUOTE]

    Spaceman, I'm a firm believer some kids get bored at the minor league level after being sent down numerous times and rightfully so.  I wish the kid all the luck in the world, we made the correct move with Cam today.  McD may be next.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: RF should be Reddicks to lose

    In Response to Re: RF should be Reddicks to lose:
    [QUOTE]space, before we go nuts lets remember kalish last year - he was solid but not the answers to our prayers...i think i would still go with drew if he's heathy - no need to put this kid in the pressure cooker just yet
    Posted by georom4[/QUOTE]

    georom, after being sent back to the minors so many times Reddick would probably welcome the challenge.  Drew is also not an answer
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from SpacemanEephus. Show SpacemanEephus's posts

    Re: RF should be Reddicks to lose

    In Response to Re: RF should be Reddicks to lose:
    [QUOTE]space, before we go nuts lets remember kalish last year - he was solid but not the answers to our prayers...i think i would still go with drew if he's heathy - no need to put this kid in the pressure cooker just yet
    Posted by georom4[/QUOTE]

    I don't know geo.  I get the kalish reference.  But last year was kalish's first go round with the big club.  Josh has been doing the shuttle for a while now.  In my eyes, he is seasoned in a different way than Kalish was.  In any case, I don't think giving him some run is putting him in a pressure cooker.  But, for the moment, until either a. drew heats up or b. trade deadline, I think it can do nothing but good to let the kid do his thang.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: RF should be Reddicks to lose

    In Response to Re: RF should be Reddicks to lose:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: RF should be Reddicks to lose : fivekatz, I hear you but just because a kid hit 234 at AAA has no bearing on what he has done in the bigs.  A lot of kids do this and go on to good major league careers.  Ellsbury would probably be more of a "red flag" because his agent is Boras. Kemp and Either, regardless of where they stand in the Dodger lineup are probably looked at as two of the more high priced obligations moving forward.  A lot of struggling teams say one thing and then do another thats the norm. Our managements hands are tied because I don't see Drew or Cam having much trade value.  In this case they either ride out their contracts in hopes they turn things around, or make a move that may hurt their wallet but save our season.  Its tough to swallow for any ownership but we have 21 plus mil tied up in three part time players who are doing very little to help our cause.
    Posted by craze4sox[/QUOTE]On Reddick all I am saying is there is real time and message board time. The RS have been delibrate with Reddick. By using the platoons not only was Tito putting Reddick in the best position to succeed, it also apparently forced the issue with one of his three dead OF ABs in Cameron. The RS often take a longer view than we do and it is probably a real good thing. Just in recent years Buch would have been traded for Salty, Salty DFAed for Benji Molina and in 2007 Dustin Pedroia would have been sent back to Pawtucket in April of that year. Oh and David Ortiz would have been DFAed in 2009. 

    As far as the two Dodger OFers go, keep in mind it is the Dodgers, not the KC Royals. And that team needs to be positioned for sale to owner that will be doing business in a city where you can make a ton of money with a winning product and lose your tail because of all the entertainment options if you are a loser without star power.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: RF should be Reddicks to lose

    In Response to Re: RF should be Reddicks to lose:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: RF should be Reddicks to lose : On Reddick all I am saying is there is real time and message board time. The RS have been delibrate with Reddick. By using the platoons not only was Tito putting Reddick in the best position to succeed, it also apparently forced the issue with one of his three dead OF ABs in Cameron. The RS often take a longer view than we do and it is probably a real good thing. Just in recent years Buch would have been traded for Salty, Salty DFAed for Benji Molina and in 2007 Dustin Pedroia would have been sent back to Pawtucket in April of that year. Oh and David Ortiz would have been DFAed in 2009.  As far as the two Dodger OFers go, keep in mind it is the Dodgers, not the KC Royals. And that team needs to be positioned for sale to owner that will be doing business in a city where you can make a ton of money with a winning product and lose your tail because of all the entertainment options if you are a loser without star power.
    Posted by fivekatz[/QUOTE]

    Good points fivekatz I'm just glad we made the move on Cam but for some reason I think there may be more to follow, as there should be.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: RF should be Reddicks to lose

    fivekatz, I hear you but just because a kid hit 234 at AAA has no bearing on what he has done in the bigs. 

    You mean Josh's .235 career ML BA?
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: RF should be Reddicks to lose

    In Response to Re: RF should be Reddicks to lose:
    [QUOTE]fivekatz, I hear you but just because a kid hit 234 at AAA has no bearing on what he has done in the bigs.  You mean Josh's .235 career ML BA?
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    My bad if thats what you meant fivekatz, sorry
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: RF should be Reddicks to lose

    I was actually joking; not about his career BA, but that his minor league numbers will always translate into similar ML numbers. Some guys get better in the majors. Reddick's OBP did improve a lot in the minors this year.

    I am really pulling for this guy. I know boom has had high hopes for him for over a couple years now, but he might finally be hitting his stride.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from beavis. Show beavis's posts

    Re: RF should be Reddicks to lose

    JD needs to be designated for assignment...Borass says its ok...

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from thee-yazzer. Show thee-yazzer's posts

    Re: RF should be Reddicks to lose

    "drew is not an answer."---craze4sox

    he is to this question: what is the name of the RF who is one of the worst free agent signings ever?
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from ma6dragon9. Show ma6dragon9's posts

    Re: RF should be Reddicks to lose

    In Response to Re: RF should be Reddicks to lose:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: RF should be Reddicks to lose : On Reddick all I am saying is there is real time and message board time. The RS have been delibrate with Reddick. By using the platoons not only was Tito putting Reddick in the best position to succeed, it also apparently forced the issue with one of his three dead OF ABs in Cameron. The RS often take a longer view than we do and it is probably a real good thing. Just in recent years Buch would have been traded for Salty, Salty DFAed for Benji Molina and in 2007 Dustin Pedroia would have been sent back to Pawtucket in April of that year. Oh and David Ortiz would have been DFAed in 2009.  As far as the two Dodger OFers go, keep in mind it is the Dodgers, not the KC Royals. And that team needs to be positioned for sale to owner that will be doing business in a city where you can make a ton of money with a winning product and lose your tail because of all the entertainment options if you are a loser without star power.
    Posted by fivekatz[/QUOTE]

    This is all true. However, it's been my understanding, and history seems to point towards this, that incoming owners typically prefer as little guaranteed money as possible going forward. These billionaires don't like being told they HAVE to pay X player Y amount of money. The Sox ownership tried every year from acquiring the Sox on to dump Manny.

    That being said, I don't think it's totally out of the question to see one of these two (Kemp/Ethier) moved for promising younger parts, or more controllable at least, as Ellsbury would be for an extra year than Kemp. A new owner is definitely NOT going to want to buy this team in the mess their in, and immediately have to negotiate with it's best player. That's a headache on top of a headache.

    Sox ownership basically gave no money to existing players. Lowe/Nomar/Pedro and later Manny were all traded, or left to walk. They (the team) wanted THEIR players, for better or worse.

    It's far easier to make a team your own when there aren't any big contracts or big egos left over from previous ownership, who may have let these guys do whatever they want on top of it (ahem...MANNY!).
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from b126962. Show b126962's posts

    Re: RF should be Reddicks to lose

     I say that once Crawford comes back, they shift Reddick to right and bench Drew. If Reddick proves that he is not the answer, they should put together a trade for someone like Beltran. Beltran has been producing pretty well, but since the Mets are in 2nd place, it'll take a good offer to pry him away from New York. The Red Sox are likely to make some sort of trade at the deadline, even if it is just for a reliver.
     On another note, watch for Lars Anderson to be shipped during July. He has potential to be a very good hitter someday, but Gonzalez will block first for the forseeable future. Anderson will be ready long before Papi or Gonzo leave, so watch for him to be shipped along with other prospects for someone like Beltran.
     
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from b126962. Show b126962's posts

    Re: RF should be Reddicks to lose

     Also, I would love to see Kemp in Boston, but it's not going to happen unless they get rid of Ellsbury and the whole farm, which would be bad. Sure, Crawford has the skills needed to lead off, but this team would have no leadoff hitter against lefties, Crawford is uncomfortable leading off, and most importantly, the team is 31-13 with CrawBerry up and running, compared to 14-21 with CrawBerry either slumping or split.
     Eithier is a more realistic option, but he is a lefty and horrible when facing lefthanders.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from snakeoil123. Show snakeoil123's posts

    Re: RF should be Reddicks to lose

    Reddick was hitting 230 in Pawtucket.  Which is what Drew is hitting in the majors.  He did show a lot of pop down there but just because he is on fire for 30 at bats doesn't mean you throw him out there all the time.  I agree he deserves a spot on the team but they aren't going to sit Drew for him...yet anyway.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from tom-uk. Show tom-uk's posts

    Re: RF should be Reddicks to lose

    On another note, watch for Lars Anderson to be shipped during July. He has potential to be a very good hitter someday,

    I think it is likely that Lars will not become a mlb player. 

    187 AAA games .750 OPS
    177 AA  .774  
    87 A+  .928
    124 A  .828 

    Over the larger sample size in the upper minors his power has dropped too much.

    He will be 24 in Sep. So you could be right but I wouldn't bet on it.


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

    Re: RF should be Reddicks to lose

    In Response to Re: RF should be Reddicks to lose:
    [QUOTE]Reddick was hitting 230 in Pawtucket.  Which is what Drew is hitting in the majors.  He did show a lot of pop down there but just because he is on fire for 30 at bats doesn't mean you throw him out there all the time.  I agree he deserves a spot on the team but they aren't going to sit Drew for him...yet anyway.
    Posted by snakeoil123[/QUOTE]

    snakeoil, history tells me the same thing but I would sit Drew a few games anyway if I were Terry.  It may just light a fire under J.D. enough to get him going a bit.  McD could be next on the chopping block just to cover LHP's a bit better.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from tom-uk. Show tom-uk's posts

    Re: RF should be Reddicks to lose

    but they aren't going to sit Drew for him...yet anyway.       

    I think you may be right but do you think Reddick makes that catch that Drew dropped? I do, even after he pulled that one hand drop on an easy pop this week.     

    Hard catch I know but Drew's value is in large part thanks to making tough catches look easy, and this year he has dropped a few.         
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: RF should be Reddicks to lose

    In Response to Re: RF should be Reddicks to lose:
    [QUOTE]but they aren't going to sit Drew for him... yet anyway.         I think you may be right but do you think Reddick makes that catch that Drew dropped? I do, even after he pulled that one hand drop on an easy pop this week.       Hard catch I know but Drew's value is in large part thanks to making tough catches look easy, and this year he has dropped a few.          
    Posted by tom-uk[/QUOTE]

    Drew has had his share of aging this season and Josh is still learning the ropes so its hard to say who may be A better fielder at this point.  Josh is faster and a better hitter until J.D. proves he still has something left in the tank.

    Today was a much needed Baby Step!
     

Share