Jump to content


Yo! You're not logged in. Why am I seeing this ad?

Photo

No Wake for World Series, per Tito's Press Conference


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
109 replies to this topic

#1 Section15Box113

  • 3,738 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 02:24 PM

Tito's press conference being carried live on WEEI.

Beckett, Schilling and Daisuke for games 1-3. Wake is a no-go.

No 4th starter announced, but Lester being stretched out for a possible start.









Edited to include source in first post of thread.

Edited by Section15Box113, 23 October 2007 - 02:56 PM.


#2 Section15Box113

  • 3,738 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 02:24 PM

Wake speaking now.

Could barely throw his side session due to his shoulder.

Edited by Section15Box113, 23 October 2007 - 02:33 PM.


#3 kartvelo

  • 3,850 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 02:27 PM

where is this?

#4 Section15Box113

  • 3,738 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 02:28 PM

"If I do this, I'm at serious risk of injuring myself for the rest of my life."

Implication is that by shutting it down, could be ready for next year.

#5 Section15Box113

  • 3,738 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 02:28 PM

where is this?


Press conference carried live on WEEI.

#6 TheRealness


  • Don't make him go all Lucic on your ash


  • 8,358 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 02:29 PM

Wake sounds defeated. Truly dissapointing for him, but its the right decision. Colorado will light him up.

Lets hope Lester builds on his second appearance in the ALCS, where he threw very well mixing up his pitches and locating well.

The tone of Wake's voice is one of the more depressing things I've heard today.

#7 MartyBarrettMVP

  • 2,169 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 02:31 PM

Wake sounds defeated. Truly dissapointing for him, but its the right decision. Colorado will light him up.

Lets hope Lester builds on his second appearance in the ALCS, where he threw very well mixing up his pitches and locating well.

The tone of Wake's voice is one of the more depressing things I've heard today.


Yeah it was very sad to listen to but it's for the best for his health and for the team.

#8 Rasputin


  • Will outlive SeanBerry


  • 26,415 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 02:32 PM

At his age any significant injury has to raise the question of whether his career is over. I imagine that being faced with that question and the inability to perform on the highest stage your profession has at the same time would be kind of depressing to anyone.

#9 Mugsys Jock


  • Longtime Member


  • 4,225 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 02:38 PM

So Tavarez added, and Gagne lives for another round?

#10 Cumberland Blues

  • 4,214 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 02:40 PM

Who'll get Wake's roster spot? Can Corey get this slot? I think they only have the two 60-day DL slots used by Ellsbury & Lester for guys not on the 25 man or DL as of 8/31 - Corey would be my first choice, but if that's not allowed it's either Snyder or Tavarez. Snyder generally pitched better - but the crazy man has the killer G/F ratio which will be handy in Denver, so I think I'd go with him over Snyder.

#11 Bleedred

  • 4,067 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 02:41 PM

Of what possible use is Gagne on the roster, unless they anticipate many 11-2 victories or 11-2 losses? He has consistently shown that he cannot get anyone out in high leverage situations, so I don't understand what his purpose is?

#12 PedroKsBambino


  • SoSH Member


  • 14,625 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 02:42 PM

Especially since Colo can chew up pitchers environment-wise I think this actually does in Gagne on the roster. At least, I hope so.

If Wake and his theoretical ability to eat innings is gone, I think you want both Tavarez and someone else who can go multiple innings---Snyder would be my guess, but Hansack is possible as well. Corey may be an option---it's not totally clear to me what the injury replacement pool for the WS is but some have suggested if you pull off Wake you could plug him in.

Edited by PedroKsBambino, 23 October 2007 - 02:43 PM.


#13 syoo8

  • 929 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 02:43 PM

'EEI also reports that Ellsbury is starting Wednesday.

#14 William Robertson

  • 3,469 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 02:46 PM

Of what possible use is Gagne on the roster, unless they anticipate many 11-2 victories or 11-2 losses? He has consistently shown that he cannot get anyone out in high leverage situations, so I don't understand what his purpose is?


Maybe I'm stupid, but I think you answered your own question. It's unlikely that you'll go seven games
without a low-leverage situation or two. At long last, Gagne proved that at least he can do that, so what's wrong with letting him? Yeah, I know, the answer is to use the spot for someone else, but whoever gets the very last spot is going to bring some liabilities along with the assets.

#15 Paradigm


  • juju all over his tits


  • 5,935 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 02:46 PM

Is Buchholz 100% shut down, or could he be the replacement?

#16 LynnRoyalRooter

  • 614 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 02:47 PM

Of what possible use is Gagne on the roster, unless they anticipate many 11-2 victories or 11-2 losses? He has consistently shown that he cannot get anyone out in high leverage situations, so I don't understand what his purpose is?


It's insane to have him on the roster as he can't give you length or pitch in a tight game. Basically the worst of both worlds.
Christ, bring up Moss for OF depth if Crisp's knee is going to slow him down. With PHing, you might need the extra hitter.

#17 TallerThanPedroia


  • Civilly Disobedient


  • 8,896 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 02:47 PM

Ellsbury and Lester are using the two original "DL" spots from Clement and Donnelly. I have no idea if they can use the same trick with Wakefield's spot.

Otherwise it's Snyder, Tavarez, and Cash who were on the roster on 8/31.

#18 Noah

  • 3,169 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 02:47 PM

Who'll get Wake's roster spot? Can Corey get this slot? I think they only have the two 60-day DL slots used by Ellsbury & Lester for guys not on the 25 man or DL as of 8/31 - Corey would be my first choice, but if that's not allowed it's either Snyder or Tavarez. Snyder generally pitched better - but the crazy man has the killer G/F ratio which will be handy in Denver, so I think I'd go with him over Snyder.


We had a long and fruitless discussion about this a few weeks ago, but I am almost positive that Corey could replace Wakefield on the roster in the same way that Ellsbury and Lester replaced Clement and Donnelly. I am quite sure that the "K-Rod loophole" says nothing about the replaced players being on any disabled list, just that they must be "injured and unable to perform."

#19 PedroKsBambino


  • SoSH Member


  • 14,625 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 02:49 PM

The KRod loophole does not apply here.

But, it's quite possible that the other loophole for during-playoff replacements may allow Corey to come in for Wake.

I just don't know on that second point.

#20 LahoudOrBillyC


  • Indian name is Massages Ellsbury


  • 3,937 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 02:53 PM

If Lester is "possible", this certainly implies that there are other possibilities. Like Beckett.

#21 Lose Remerswaal


  • Leaves after the 8th inning


  • 22,805 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 02:54 PM

The KRod loophole does not apply here.

But, it's quite possible that the other loophole for during-playoff replacements may allow Corey to come in for Wake.

I just don't know on that second point.

I'm sure the Clemens maneuver is doable -- prove the injury and you can replace a pitcher with a pitcher in the same series. No way you can't do that between series

#22 glennhoffmania


  • Rudy of P&G


  • 8,384,826 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 02:55 PM

If Lester is "possible", this certainly implies that there are other possibilities. Like Beckett.


That would mean Schilling would have to go in game 5 on three days rest.

Edit: unless they just use Lester in game 5 instead of game 4. Barring a 3-0 deficit, I don't know if it really matters.

Edited by glennhoffmania, 23 October 2007 - 02:56 PM.


#23 TallerThanPedroia


  • Civilly Disobedient


  • 8,896 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 02:55 PM

If Lester is "possible", this certainly implies that there are other possibilities. Like Beckett.


Tavarez definitely can replace Wakefield, so he'd be the only other possibility. I doubt they'd start Hansack even if he could get on the roster, and he's the only other guy besides Buchholz to start for us this year.

#24 Oil Can Dan


  • SoSH Member


  • 5,024 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 02:56 PM

How do you stretch a guy out to go from the pen to the starting rotation in a week?

#25 PedroKsBambino


  • SoSH Member


  • 14,625 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 02:57 PM

I'm sure the Clemens maneuver is doable -- prove the injury and you can replace a pitcher with a pitcher in the same series. No way you can't do that between series


Right, I agree on that in terms of replacing him. Keep in mind that for Clemens, the 'cost' of replacing him in-series was he was ineligible for the next series. That is different here.

The sub-question is whether you can replace him with someone who was not on the 25 man as of 8/31, such as Corey. I simply don't know---I've seen reasonable descriptions both ways.

#26 jacklamabe65


  • A New Frontier butt boy


  • 6,118 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 03:01 PM

Lester for four-to-five innings in Game 4; Bat Shit for 2-3 innings?

#27 Section15Box113

  • 3,738 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 03:02 PM

How do you stretch a guy out to go from the pen to the starting rotation in a week?


Generally, you don't.

But remember it's a little different with someone who's already stretched out from starting throughout the season.
Last start was 9/26: 94 pitches.
The week before, he threw 108.

Not saying that he'd be ready to go that deep, but it's not like we're talking about MDC here.

Edited by Section15Box113, 23 October 2007 - 03:02 PM.


#28 bsj


  • Renegade Crazed Genius


  • 15,489 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 03:02 PM

Right, I agree on that in terms of replacing him. Keep in mind that for Clemens, the 'cost' of replacing him in-series was he was ineligible for the next series. That is different here.

The sub-question is whether you can replace him with someone who was not on the 25 man as of 8/31, such as Corey. I simply don't know---I've seen reasonable descriptions both ways.



I was under the impression that if a player on your 25 man postseason roster was 60 day DLd, then you can add another player from your 40 man roster, as long as that player plays the same position? is this not correct?

If we can pull it off, my preference is Tavarez and Corey. if not, I suppose Snyder?

Edited by bsj, 23 October 2007 - 03:07 PM.


#29 biollante


  • SoSH Member


  • 7,873 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 03:03 PM

I thought Clay was also shut down for the year.

Basically, someone has to pick up Wake's 4 or 5 innings. Should not be an impossible task.

#30 Todd Benzinger

  • 4,293 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 03:07 PM

Given that I have tons of stuff to do today, I thought it would be smart to waste time searching the web for the "new" rule on postseason replacements.

I haven't found it yet, but here's a seemingly authoritative post from Bradford's blog this past May.

3. Post-season roster eligibility

The pool of players eligible for the postseason is made up of the 25 players active on August 31, plus any players on the 15-day or 60-day DL on that date. Any of those players can be replaced by another player (who must have been in the organization on August 31) if the eligible player is injured at the time of the postseason series. Therefore, if a team has no players on the DL
on August 31, it has very little flexibility in choosing its postseason roster. Also, there was a rule change with the new CBA, whereby now teams can replace an injured player during the middle of a series.


Doesn't entirely clear it up. "Any of those players can be replaced by another player (who must have been in the organization on August 31) if the eligible player is injured at the time of the postseason series" suggests that you could possibly replace Wake with anyone in the org as of Aug 31st (Corey? I really doubt they'd use Buchholz.) ...And then you could replace Gagne with Tavarez, because they are both already eligible.

#31 ShoelessJoe

  • 1,882 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 03:08 PM

Clay is shut down. He is eligible to play in the World Series, but the front office has made it pretty clear that he's done for the year. Besides, he hasn't pitched in over 3 weeks. It's not happening.

#32 bsj


  • Renegade Crazed Genius


  • 15,489 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 03:10 PM

Thats a very confusing post by Bradford.

The pool of players eligible for the postseason is made up of the 25 players active on August 31, plus any players on the 15-day or 60-day DL on that date. Any of those players can be replaced by another player (who must have been in the organization on August 31) if the eligible player is injured at the time of the postseason series. Therefore, if a team has no players on the DL
on August 31, it has very little flexibility in choosing its postseason roster
. Also, there was a rule change with the new CBA, whereby now teams can replace an injured player during the middle of a series.



He says that a player can be replaced by ANYONE in the organization. But then he IMPLIES that the only players that can be inserted as replacements are those who are on the roster or on the DL by asserting that if no one is on the DL as of August 31 there is no flexibility.

Edited by bsj, 23 October 2007 - 03:11 PM.


#33 jsinger121


  • @jsinger121


  • 10,974 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 03:12 PM

Clay is shut down. He is eligible to play in the World Series, but the front office has made it pretty clear that he's done for the year. Besides, he hasn't pitched in over 3 weeks. It's not happening.


Combined with the fact he will be starting his offseason workout program at API on October 28th.

#34 DeltaForce

  • 2,902 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 03:15 PM

I was under the impression that if a player on your 25 man postseason roster was 60 day DLd, then you can add another player from your 40 man roster, as long as that player plays the same position? is this not correct?


That understanding is incorrect for two reasons:

1. The second clause of your question should be changed to "another player that was in your organization as of August 31."

2. The third clause ("same position") has been eliminated, which is why Ellsbury is postseason-eligible.

The open issue is whether Wake's injury opens up a third "slot" (like Donnelly's and Clement's) for a third guy who was not on the 25-man roster as of 8/31 (Lester and Ellsbury already occupy the other two slots). We've had a lot of debate on this, but no clear answer, although the most logical answer (putting aside the semantics of the argument) is yes.

Edited by DeltaForce, 23 October 2007 - 03:16 PM.


#35 Paradigm


  • juju all over his tits


  • 5,935 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 03:16 PM

The Tavarez move wouldn't be terrible; he's the only sinkerball pitcher in the group and if he's anything effective, that'd be an asset in Coors. Hopefully the coaching staff is watching sessions before they finalize the roster to see how everyone is throwing.

#36 Paul M


  • SoSH Member


  • 10,381 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 03:16 PM

Bradford is right; if you have no DL players, you'd be stuck with the 25 players active on 8/31. With the one caveat being a player who is injured during the post-season could be replaced with anyone in the organization as of 8/31.

I actually don't think they will drop Gagne, and they will activate Tavarez to replace Wakefield.

#37 ragecage

  • 3,987 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 03:19 PM

How do you stretch a guy out to go from the pen to the starting rotation in a week?

On Sunday night before Game 7 I was at the park early, and noticed that Farrell and Lester came out early and were stretching together and playing long-toss. It seemed a bit out of place to me for some reason. My thought was that they wanted to have Lester ready immediately in case Dice-K got into early trouble (and that may have been the case), but in light of the Wake announcement I'm thinking they may have been working on this for a few days at least.

#38 DeltaForce

  • 2,902 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 03:20 PM

Thats a very confusing post by Bradford.
He says that a player can be replaced by ANYONE in the organization. But then he IMPLIES that the only players that can be inserted as replacements are those who are on the roster or on the DL by asserting that if no one is on the DL as of August 31 there is no flexibility.

The "anyone in the organization" refers to the player doing the replacing.

The "DL as of August 31" refers to the player being replaced.

The open question is whether an "eligible" player who was on the 25-man roster as of 9/1 but who gets injured later can be replaced by "anyone in the organization" or only by someone who was already postseason-eligible. The former interpretation is the more sensible one --- otherwise, if nobody is on the DL as of 9/1, and someone gets hurt later, the team is stuck with a 24-man team --- but MLB doesn't appear to release the text of its internal rules for some reason, so no one knows.

Edited by DeltaForce, 23 October 2007 - 03:21 PM.


#39 TomRicardo


  • rusty cohlebone


  • 18,441 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 03:21 PM

Tavarez is the move over Corey. You have no idea how long Lester will last and Tavarez can give you more innings and has a better G/F ratio. That makes him inifinitely more valuable than Corey who would be 5th in the bullpen depth chart anyway.

#40 TheoShmeo


  • made johnny damon think long and hard


  • 8,422 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 03:21 PM

The Tavarez move wouldn't be terrible; he's the only sinkerball pitcher in the group and if he's anything effective, that'd be an asset in Coors. Hopefully the coaching staff is watching sessions before they finalize the roster to see how everyone is throwing.

I can't imagine that watching the potential replacements isn't part of the overall equation.

On the shutting down CB point, is it really irrevocable? Sure, they told him he's done, but losing Wake is a surprise and I guess I don't see why they couldn't reverse course on Buchholz in that light. I don't really expect that to happen, but the fact that they told him he isn't going to pitch again this year doesn't, by itself, preclude him from getting ready for the WS now. Or does it?

#41 PedroKsBambino


  • SoSH Member


  • 14,625 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 03:22 PM

The problem is that once a pitcher goes a couple weeks without throwing (as Buchholz reportedly has) it takes longer to get back to 5 inning arm strength than they have. You have to build there and there's not enough time to do so...

Edited by PedroKsBambino, 23 October 2007 - 03:23 PM.


#42 Todd Benzinger

  • 4,293 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 03:22 PM

Bradford is right; if you have no DL players, you'd be stuck with the 25 players active on 8/31. With the one caveat being a player who is injured during the post-season could be replaced with anyone in the organization as of 8/31.

I actually don't think they will drop Gagne, and they will activate Tavarez to replace Wakefield.


This is what I've been looking for... do you have a better source than Bradford for the caveat part? i haven't been able to find it anywhere. An old site called "Roster Central" seems to no longer exist, and mlb.com gives only a very brief summary of roster rules that doesn't address this.

#43 Pearl Wilson


  • SoSH Member


  • 6,130 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 03:22 PM

I haven't sought out a scouting report on the Rockies, but being a young team is it possible that they may be aggressive enough to swing at Gagne's stuff like Cleveland did when they were pressing the other night?

Regarding Buchholz, I am curious as well. Here is what was said at the time:

The Sox GM said the only other option to shutting him down completely was to have Buchholz not throw for 10 days to two weeks, then follow with a two-week throwing progression which would have given Buchholz the opportunity to maybe throw a couple of innings in the World Series. In the end, Epstein said, the benefit of that was not worth the potential risk.

Link from 9/28

I wonder if there is ANY chance at all they've been evaluating Clay and had him do any throwing since then... my guess is probably not.

#44 TomRicardo


  • rusty cohlebone


  • 18,441 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 03:23 PM

I wonder if there is ANY chance at all they've been evaluating Clay and had him do any throwing since then... my guess is probably not.


Sounds like they didn't even bother. Tavarez is probably a better option anyway.

#45 86spike


  • Currently enjoying "Arli$$"


  • 22,217 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 03:23 PM

This is the second year in a row where Wakefield has had a major injury.

I really wonder if his body is telling him to retire.

As for a Lester start... bring it on.

I like breaking up the routine a bit with a LHP.

#46 Todd Benzinger

  • 4,293 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 03:24 PM

Tavarez is the move over Corey. You have no idea how long Lester will last and Tavarez can give you more innings and has a better G/F ratio. That makes him inifinitely more valuable than Corey who would be 5th in the bullpen depth chart anyway.


Of course. Corey only comes into it if they decide to dump Gagne, but he would have to fill Wakes' injury spot, if that works. Not sure, and it probably doesn't matter, because they will probably keep Gagne over Corey anyway.

#47 Lose Remerswaal


  • Leaves after the 8th inning


  • 22,805 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 03:25 PM

On Sunday night before Game 7 I was at the park early, and noticed that Farrell and Lester came out early and were stretching together and playing long-toss. It seemed a bit out of place to me for some reason. My thought was that they wanted to have Lester ready immediately in case Dice-K got into early trouble (and that may have been the case), but in light of the Wake announcement I'm thinking they may have been working on this for a few days at least.

Lester also warmed up JD Drew each of the first 3 innings, which doesn't always happen, and he longtossed even longer before Game 6

#48 GreyisGone

  • 1,134 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 03:25 PM

There is a 0% chance Buchholz is on the roster. He was shut down because of a weak shoulder, they last thing they're going to do is take a guy who hasn't thrown in 3 weeks and try to get him ready to face major league hitters in 2 days. Going from 0 to 100 with a healthy shoulder is a big risk, not to mention one as weak as the Red Sox implied his is/was.

#49 86spike


  • Currently enjoying "Arli$$"


  • 22,217 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 03:30 PM

And now for the cold hard truthful side of my psyche:

as much as I love Wakefield for all he's meant to this team over the years... I'm very happy he won't be pitching this series. The way he can go from unhittable to complete crap in a heartbeat (see Game 4 in Cleveland) is just too much risk to take at this stage in the year. Thanks for everything Tim and I hope your shoulder heals up this winter... but I won't miss you.

#50 RSN Diaspora


  • molests goats for comedy


  • 5,490 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 03:36 PM

On the shutting down CB point, is it really irrevocable? Sure, they told him he's done, but losing Wake is a surprise and I guess I don't see why they couldn't reverse course on Buchholz in that light. I don't really expect that to happen, but the fact that they told him he isn't going to pitch again this year doesn't, by itself, preclude him from getting ready for the WS now. Or does it?


I think asking a rookie (and barely a rookie at that) to, in two days, prepare mentally and physically for a World Series after three weeks off is unrealistic. They're better served with Batshit.