Vote: Should Bradley be sent down to save nearly a year of arbitration control 7 years from now when Ortiz Comes off the DL?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from TheFoe13. Show TheFoe13's posts

    Re: Vote: Should Bradley be sent down to save nearly a year of arbitration control 7 years from now when Ortiz Comes off the DL?

    In response to SpacemanEephus' comment:

    In response to soxnewmex's comment:

     

    If we like him, we can sign him to a long term contract long before the time of his free agency option arrives, like they do with guys they like in Tampa Bay, then it's not even an issue.

     



    who?  longoria, in the lone example.  though they had to sign him through 2022 to get it done.

     

     



    and hand out the biggest contract in DevilRays history..

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from 2004Idiot. Show 2004Idiot's posts

    Re: Vote: Should Bradley be sent down to save nearly a year of arbitration control 7 years from now when Ortiz Comes off the DL?

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

    Gomes would obviously be the new starting LF'er.

    I vote No!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



    No

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from MadMc44. Show MadMc44's posts

    Re: Vote: Should Bradley be sent down to save nearly a year of arbitration control 7 years from now when Ortiz Comes off the DL?

    Softy Law---I believe you would send him down today regardless of your typical wishy washy comments in this post.

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Vote: Should Bradley be sent down to save nearly a year of arbitration control 7 years from now when Ortiz Comes off the DL?

    Beans are meant to be counted.

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Kingface12. Show Kingface12's posts

    Re: Vote: Should Bradley be sent down to save nearly a year of arbitration control 7 years from now when Ortiz Comes off the DL?

    So let me get this straight.....we either agree with you or vote yes and get to read lame little insults about us from you...who for all we know is a 15 year old boy..OR GIRL that lives in their grandparents basement.....

    FWIW....I vote No.....if they wanted to save the year they should have did it to start the season....

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

    Re: Vote: Should Bradley be sent down to save nearly a year of arbitration control 7 years from now when Ortiz Comes off the DL?

    If this was 2011, the answer would be to send him dowm, but the landscape has changed. The Sox have the Rays, Jays, O's and Yankees to contend with, anyone of those teams could win the division. Every game is important, and putting forth the best line-up is critical. Long range planning goes out the window. The bean counters know that ratings are down, ticket sales are down and Bradley will need to stay up. The last time Ortiz was cleared to play. he came back for one game! He hurt himself trotting out an A-Gon HR, there is no guarantee he'll play, or play well. Who knows if in seven years the team will be competitive, rebuilding or bridging? He stays.

     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from MadMc44. Show MadMc44's posts

    Re: Vote: Should Bradley be sent down to save nearly a year of arbitration control 7 years from now when Ortiz Comes off the DL?

    Sox management may not lock up JBJ for perhaps two years because they have Gomes for 2 years and ShaVic for three but I believe this will give them a year to make that decision. I think if he does well this season they may do what the Angels did with Trout this year and bump him up to close to a $1 M. 

    Pedroia may be extended during this season and Lester, perhaps after the season, depending on his performance.

    I'm not a good predictor but it seems to be  Sox management MO.

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

    Re: Vote: Should Bradley be sent down to save nearly a year of arbitration control 7 years from now when Ortiz Comes off the DL?

    Sox have extended other guys that were a fit, not everyone waits to try free agency, lots of guys like the team they're on, forego free agency, and sign on long term; could very well happen with Bradley.

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

    Re: Vote: Should Bradley be sent down to save nearly a year of arbitration control 7 years from now when Ortiz Comes off the DL?

    In response to Bill-806's comment:

    In response to youkillus's comment:

     

    If this was 2011, the answer would be to send him dowm, but the landscape has changed. The Sox have the Rays, Jays, O's and Yankees to contend with, anyone of those teams could win the division. Every game is important, and putting forth the best line-up is critical. Long range planning goes out the window. The bean counters know that ratings are down, ticket sales are down and Bradley will need to stay up. The last time Ortiz was cleared to play. he came back for one game! He hurt himself trotting out an A-Gon HR, there is no guarantee he'll play, or play well. Who knows if in seven years the team will be competitive, rebuilding or bridging? He stays.

     

    Thanks Youk & welcome back.......   I can't believe how much hate BILL-806 is taking on the state of David Ortizs ability to comeback or even play again........  HEEL injuries are never kind to baseball players !!!

     




     Thanks Bill, it's good to be back. Mr. Ortiz missed 35 games after that devastating collision between his foot and second base, he came back for one game, and missed the last week of August, all of September, and all of Spring training...in between he signed a Schilling-esque player friendly deal. Much has been made of the team record while he was out, it's really stretching credulity if one thinks that Big Papi would have made a big difference with that team in September.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: Vote: Should Bradley be sent down to save nearly a year of arbitration control 7 years from now when Ortiz Comes off the DL?

    This is an absolutely stupid question after one game. If after the next 15 games, Ortiz is ready and  Bradley is 6-for-50 (.120) and is looking overmatched, they yeah, send him down, let him regroup and in the meantime you gain that one year.

    If Bradley is batting .270-or-better, playing good defense, is showing a good approach at the plate with occasional pop and the Sox are playing good ball as a team, then I'll say bye-bye to Nava and go from there.

    If Bradley is more than holding his own and the Sox are playing good ball, then I'll keep him and take my chances down the road. But if he goes into a bad slump, then maybe a 20-day trip to the minors will get him back on track.

    Personally, I really think Bradley will be the real deal and possibley a ROY contender and as long as he's playing like that, I say keep him. But you never know what's going to happen, so the Sox should keep the open mind they had in the spring.

    As for now, it's a stupid question.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from TheFoe13. Show TheFoe13's posts

    Re: Vote: Should Bradley be sent down to save nearly a year of arbitration control 7 years from now when Ortiz Comes off the DL?

    In response to soxnewmex's comment:

    Sox have extended other guys that were a fit, not everyone waits to try free agency, lots of guys like the team they're on, forego free agency, and sign on long term; could very well happen with Bradley.



    you're right. a lot of guys do that... but not a lot of Borass clients. They hire him because he will get them the most money, and a common tactic he uses to do that is Free Agency. JBJ might tell Borass to shove it and bang out an extension w/ the sox in a few years but why take that chance? especially when we're talking about 20 days.. not 50 days or half a season. twenty. it's a no brainer you find some time in the season and send him down to ensure you get an extra year. and if he decides to sign an extension in the future then oh well.. you only lost 15-18 games. Hardly something that will make or break our 2013 season.

    i'll take 162 games of JBJ in his prime at the expense of 20 in his rookie season any day, all day.

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

    Re: Vote: Should Bradley be sent down to save nearly a year of arbitration control 7 years from now when Ortiz Comes off the DL?

    In response to SpacemanEephus' comment:

     I vote to secure the extra year.  But, I ammend that vote to contain the following caveat (pork barrel?):  If the team gets hot and stays hot and that success is tied in a significant way to Bradley being in the line-up every night, I am willing to lose the year for a playoff run this year.  If the Sox are safely in the playoffs in August (highly unlikely) I send him down for 20.  If the Sox are out of it, I send him down.  Or, if he scuffles for a protracted spell, regardless of team performance, I send him down.  But, if he is a spark plug integral to a surging club, I vote no on sending him down.



    I agree.  I vote to secure the extra year if sending him down is a feasible option.  There are too many unknowns at this point to give a simple yes or no answer.  IMO, it would have been easier to secure the extra year by sending him down for the first 9 games.

     

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

    Re: Vote: Should Bradley be sent down to save nearly a year of arbitration control 7 years from now when Ortiz Comes off the DL?

    In response to youkillus' comment:

     Thanks Bill, it's good to be back. Mr. Ortiz missed 35 games after that devastating collision between his foot and second base, he came back for one game, and missed the last week of August, all of September, and all of Spring training...in between he signed a Schilling-esque player friendly deal. Much has been made of the team record while he was out, it's really stretching credulity if one thinks that Big Papi would have made a big difference with thatteam in September.



    Ortiz wasn't trotting when he got hurt.  He was running hard because he didn't know that the ball was out.  I'm pretty sure he's not the first player in history to be injured by landing awkwardly on a base bag. 

    I don't get why the guy is taking heat for this injury.  He's always been a guy who wanted to play.

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

    Re: Vote: Should Bradley be sent down to save nearly a year of arbitration control 7 years from now when Ortiz Comes off the DL?

    "Unless the season is over, meaning clinched playoff spot early or out of it early, there is no reason to send Bradley down for bean counting, and put Gomes in LF as the starter."

    I'm gonna flip a little bit on this one. 

    I still strongly favor keeping the extra year but if we are in contention and Bradley is playing well, I can't see taking him down. 

    So I'm gonna go yes. Sorry to change my mind from earlier today, but this frames the issue a bit differently. 

    I can see changing my mind again, though, if we are still in contention, Ortiz is healthy, and Bradley is playing terribly then I might vote to send him down. 

    But for now I'll go with yes, play him unless we have either clinched or failed...

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

    Re: Vote: Should Bradley be sent down to save nearly a year of arbitration control 7 years from now when Ortiz Comes off the DL?

    In response to ADG's comment:

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

     

    Gomes would obviously be the new starting LF'er.

    I vote No!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

     




    Absolutely not. Read the threads that I started and who cares. The Sox are potentially close to throwing away $9.5M with Stephen Drew so why should they care about 2019.

     



    Yeah, let's keep throwing money away, because it has become a habit, but this time, let's do it into the future to insure we keep repeating our financial blunders.

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

    Re: Vote: Should Bradley be sent down to save nearly a year of arbitration control 7 years from now when Ortiz Comes off the DL?

    In response to royf19's comment:

    This is an absolutely stupid question after one game. If after the next 15 games, Ortiz is ready and  Bradley is 6-for-50 (.120) and is looking overmatched, they yeah, send him down, let him regroup and in the meantime you gain that one year.

    If Bradley is batting .270-or-better, playing good defense, is showing a good approach at the plate with occasional pop and the Sox are playing good ball as a team, then I'll say bye-bye to Nava and go from there.

    If Bradley is more than holding his own and the Sox are playing good ball, then I'll keep him and take my chances down the road. But if he goes into a bad slump, then maybe a 20-day trip to the minors will get him back on track.

    Personally, I really think Bradley will be the real deal and possibley a ROY contender and as long as he's playing like that, I say keep him. But you never know what's going to happen, so the Sox should keep the open mind they had in the spring.

    As for now, it's a stupid question.



    Hard to beleive I had to sift through so many comments, without a single person mentioning the most obvious thing in the room-context.

    It's like asking if I should bring a coat with me on vacation, without saying where I am going.

    For example, would anyone vote no if JBJ was hitting .185?  Would anyone vote yes if he were hitting .450?  Does it matter to you if Gomes is hitting .400 or .200?  Why would anyone even bother voting without being told what they were voting for?

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from S5. Show S5's posts

    Re: Vote: Should Bradley be sent down to save nearly a year of arbitration control 7 years from now when Ortiz Comes off the DL?

    I'm of the belief that Bradley will play out his string with Boston and then try the FA waters.  I believe that because, as they say, the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior, he's a Boras client and that's what Boras does.  That gives us a choice of having him for 142 games this year and 162 games they year he's 29 or 162 games this year and NO games when he's 29.

    Since most players don't reach their peak until age 28-31 I'd send him down this year and preserve him for when he's in his prime.

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

    Re: Vote: Should Bradley be sent down to save nearly a year of arbitration control 7 years from now when Ortiz Comes off the DL?

    In response to BostonTrollSpanker's comment:

    "Unless the season is over, meaning clinched playoff spot early or out of it early, there is no reason to send Bradley down for bean counting, and put Gomes in LF as the starter."

    I'm gonna flip a little bit on this one. 

    I still strongly favor keeping the extra year but if we are in contention and Bradley is playing well, I can't see taking him down. 

    So I'm gonna go yes. Sorry to change my mind from earlier today, but this frames the issue a bit differently. 

    I can see changing my mind again, though, if we are still in contention, Ortiz is healthy, and Bradley is playing terribly then I might vote to send him down. 

    But for now I'll go with yes, play him unless we have either clinched or failed...



    Here's another possible scenario:

    We are within playoff range, JBJ is hitting .285/.350/.450/.800, but we also have this:

    Papi  .300/.375/.500/.875

    Ells   .300/.365/.465/.830

    Gomes: .280/.360/.450/.810

    Shane: .280/.350/.450/.800

    I know JBJ is a better fielder than anyone here, but would missing a couple weeks really be a big loss on offense for a couple weeks?

    Would this differential outweigh losing JBJ for a year during his prime, or costing us maybe $10M more than the arb might be for that extra year?

    I guess if you are like Geo and softy, you think we'll just blow the $10M on someone useless like Drew anyways, so it makes no difference, but if you follow their so-called logic, if Sox management is that dumb, they'd probably let JBJ walk, and we'd have nothing but a draft pick to show for losing JBJ in year 7. They want it both ways. 

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share