Shortstop? We don't need no steenking shortstop!

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from donrd4. Show donrd4's posts

    Re: Shortstop? We don't need no steenking shortstop!

    In Response to Shortstop? We don't need no steenking shortstop!:
    [QUOTE]If you were uncomfortable with the idea of Silva, Cook and Padilla competing for the back of the rotation, how do you feel about Punto and Aviles (and someone else?) playing shortstop by committee?
    Posted by davetheknave[/QUOTE]

    Don't knock that someone else???????
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: Shortstop? We don't need no steenking shortstop!

    I feel a whole lot better with Punto, Aviles, and Iggy that I do with Wake as our #5.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from JB-3. Show JB-3's posts

    Re: Shortstop? We don't need no steenking shortstop!

    Since I wasn't overly uncomfortable with the ST competition for the #5 starter, am I not allowed to comment on SS?
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: Shortstop? We don't need no steenking shortstop!

    what about LF,RF? Not promising.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from jasko2248. Show jasko2248's posts

    Re: Shortstop? We don't need no steenking shortstop!

    In response to "Shortstop? We don't need no steenking shortstop!": [QUOTE]If you were uncomfortable with the idea of Silva, Cook and Padilla competing for the back of the rotation, how do you feel about Punto and Aviles (and someone else?) playing shortstop by committee? Posted by davetheknave[/QUOTE] Look at the starting shortstops for the last 10 World Series winners. Jeter is only real name and some might say he wasn't exactly a superstar in '09. Furcal was a midseason pickup last year. The need for a great shortstop to win it all ends in little league. Let's see how during training shakes out. Scutaro was a hardnosed player, but he's hardly irreplaceable...
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from jasko2248. Show jasko2248's posts

    Re: Shortstop? We don't need no steenking shortstop!

    In response to "Re: Shortstop? We don't need no steenking shortstop!": [QUOTE]I feel a whole lot better with Punto, Aviles, and Iggy that I do with Wake as our #5. Posted by Joebreidey[/QUOTE] Joe, with all the "Fantasy baseball" mindsets in this forum, I'm surprised someone has started a thread asking who's going to play "over the middle?"
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from sindarin-erebor. Show sindarin-erebor's posts

    Re: Shortstop? We don't need no steenking shortstop!

    In Response to Re: Shortstop? We don't need no steenking shortstop!:
    [QUOTE]In response to "Re: Shortstop? We don't need no steenking shortstop!": Joe, with all the "Fantasy baseball" mindsets in this forum, I'm surprised someone has started a thread asking who's going to play "over the middle?"
    Posted by jasko2248[/QUOTE]

    LOL and spot on to the many crazy trade and FA signings suggested on this forum.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from charliedarling. Show charliedarling's posts

    Re: Shortstop? We don't need no steenking shortstop!

    trading scutaro was an easy trade to make.  it got them back a young, inexpensive pitcher and almost 6 M in operating money.  he was valuable and played hard, but was easily tradable as well.

    this money might be enough to help deepen the starting rotation which if accomplished will deepen the bullpen when either bard or aceves ends up back in the pen.

    if nothing else iglesius will provide quality defense at short stop even if he is not ready to hit major league pitching.

    lots of posters always say, "let the young guys play" so this might be the plan to do that this year at shortstop.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Shortstop? We don't need no steenking shortstop!

    f you were uncomfortable with the idea of Silva, Cook and Padilla competing for the back of the rotation, how do you feel about Punto and Aviles (and someone else?) playing shortstop by committee?

    I wasn't comfortable with Silva, Cook, Padilla, miller or Doubront as back of the rotation starters, and that's why Scutaro was dealt. 

    It was an either/or choice, and Ben chose correctly. Besides, a combination of Iggy, Aviles, and Punto may very well do a better job than an aging Scutty would have done for us in 2012.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: Shortstop? We don't need no steenking shortstop!

    In Response to Shortstop? We don't need no steenking shortstop!:
    [QUOTE]If you were uncomfortable with the idea of Silva, Cook and Padilla competing for the back of the rotation, how do you feel about Punto and Aviles (and someone else?) playing shortstop by committee?
    Posted by davetheknave[/QUOTE]

    Scutaro was by far one of our best players down the stretch last season and he deserved to be brought back.  Aviles and Punto are certanly no better than Scuter and Iggy isn't ready to help offensively so we may have opened another can of worms. 

    Still needing an OF bat "Cody Ross" could be a nice fit but Oswalt is just another washed up big name pitcher with no previous AL experience.

    Garza is still the guy we need!
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bill-806. Show Bill-806's posts

    Re: Shortstop? We don't need no steenking shortstop!

      THIS WAS A GREAT MOVE !!!!  WAIT TILL BOBBY V, GETS HIS EYES ON IGGY !!
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from rickerd2. Show rickerd2's posts

    Re: Shortstop? We don't need no steenking shortstop!

    In Response to Re: Shortstop? We don't need no steenking shortstop!:
    [QUOTE]  THIS WAS A GREAT MOVE !!!!  WAIT TILL BOBBY V, GETS HIS EYES ON IGGY !!
    Posted by Bill-806[/QUOTE]



    Don't people often say that one of Bobby V's strenghts is how he works with younger players?  He may be able to get Iggy to perform.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from never1954. Show never1954's posts

    Re: Shortstop? We don't need no steenking shortstop!

    If nothing else, this will be a great spring training.  When was the last time we had so many fighting for so few spots?  Lots of competition for the rotation, SS, Catcher, RF and LF until Carl returns.  Forget the entitled players for once, work for it and work to keep it.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from georom4. Show georom4's posts

    Re: Shortstop? We don't need no steenking shortstop!

    In Response to Re: Shortstop? We don't need no steenking shortstop!:
    [QUOTE]If nothing else, this will be a great spring training.  When was the last time we had so many fighting for so few spots?  Lots of competition for the rotation, SS, Catcher, RF and LF until Carl returns.  Forget the entitled players for once, work for it and work to keep it.
    Posted by never1954[/QUOTE]

    Quite true, the Francona Country Club years are over....
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from UticaClub. Show UticaClub's posts

    Re: Shortstop? We don't need no steenking shortstop!

    Yes it is true that the Red Sox were mismanaged during April and September of 2011 but were the best in MLB during May through August. The obvious , logical answer has to be Tito, fried chicken, Bud Light, Video games, and Beckett. Elementary.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Alibiike. Show Alibiike's posts

    Re: Shortstop? We don't need no steenking shortstop!

    We haven't had a SS since 2003, what's one more year without one?
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Shortstop? We don't need no steenking shortstop!

    In Response to Re: Shortstop? We don't need no steenking shortstop!:
    [QUOTE]We haven't had a SS since 2003, what's one more year without one?
    Posted by Alibiike[/QUOTE]


    What about Cabrera and Gonzo?
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Yukon-Cornelius. Show Yukon-Cornelius's posts

    Re: Shortstop? We don't need no steenking shortstop!

    In Response to Re: Shortstop? We don't need no steenking shortstop!:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Shortstop? We don't need no steenking shortstop! : Scutaro was by far one of our best players down the stretch last season and he deserved to be brought back.  Aviles and Punto are certanly no better than Scuter and Iggy isn't ready to help offensively so we may have opened another can of worms.  Still needing an OF bat "Cody Ross" could be a nice fit but Oswalt is just another washed up big name pitcher with no previous AL experience. Garza is still the guy we need!
    Posted by craze4sox[/QUOTE]

    I agree that Scutaro was one of our best players down the stretch, but in my mind this is a case of the FO selling high (relatively speaking) on a guy whose value is likely to decline quickly since he's a 36 year old shortstop in league that doesn't value those commodities very highly.  Not only that, we can use the money elsewhere, to hopefully strengthen our rotation. 
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from ZILLAGOD. Show ZILLAGOD's posts

    Re: Shortstop? We don't need no steenking shortstop!

    Only Red Sox Nation would be highly critical and overly worried about a trade ( obvious salary dump) where the team gets a young pitcher and gets rid of an overpaid 36 year old utility infielder.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Alibiike. Show Alibiike's posts

    Re: Shortstop? We don't need no steenking shortstop!

    In Response to Re: Shortstop? We don't need no steenking shortstop!:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Shortstop? We don't need no steenking shortstop! : What about Cabrera and Gonzo?
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    yes, what about them? apparently the organization didn't think so.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Yukon-Cornelius. Show Yukon-Cornelius's posts

    Re: Shortstop? We don't need no steenking shortstop!

    In Response to Re: Shortstop? We don't need no steenking shortstop!:
    [QUOTE]Only Red Sox Nation would be highly critical and overly worried about a trade ( obvious salary dump) where the team gets a young pitcher and gets rid of an overpaid 36 year old utility infielder.
    Posted by ZILLAGOD[/QUOTE]

    If you think it's bad here, take a wander over to the Patriots forum and see the same kind of over-the-top criticism of a team that just freaking made it to the Super Bowl.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Shortstop? We don't need no steenking shortstop!

    n Response to Re: Shortstop? We don't need no steenking shortstop!:
    In Response to Re: Shortstop? We don't need no steenking shortstop! : What about Cabrera and Gonzo?
    Posted by moonslav59


    yes, what about them? apparently the organization didn't think so.
    You said this earlier...


    We haven't had a SS since 2003, what's one more year without one?

    Cabrera and Gonzo were our SSs after 2003. Yes, they have been few and far between, but we have had a couple decent fielding SSs since 2003.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Alibiike. Show Alibiike's posts

    Re: Shortstop? We don't need no steenking shortstop!

    In Response to Re: Shortstop? We don't need no steenking shortstop!:
    [QUOTE]Only Red Sox Nation would be highly critical and overly worried about a trade ( obvious salary dump) where the team gets a young pitcher and gets rid of an overpaid 36 year old utility infielder.
    Posted by ZILLAGOD[/QUOTE]

    I think it was the right move, finally. Don't know why we signed him in the first place.
    I'm a proponent of letting Iglesias run with the SS position, we'll know by the trade deadline if he can cut it.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from ZILLAGOD. Show ZILLAGOD's posts

    Re: Shortstop? We don't need no steenking shortstop!

    In Response to Re: Shortstop? We don't need no steenking shortstop!:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Shortstop? We don't need no steenking shortstop! : If you think it's bad here, take a wander over to the Patriots forum and see the same kind of over-the-top criticism of a team that just freaking made it to the Super Bowl.
    Posted by Yukon-Cornelius[/QUOTE]

    No thanks my love affair with NFL football ended years ago with Steve Grogan....now that was a football player!

    Today's NFL is a bunch of overpaid thugs and millionaire owners with only one thing important to them...separating fans from their money. NFL football on T.V. is like watching a freak show with endless commercials. And what's up with that stupid animation of a robot/player that FOX always shows on the bottom lefthand corner of my screen?

    A once great game ruined by unrestrained capitalism and thug mentality.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share