Jump to content


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

Photo

Lowrie called up, Lowell DL


This topic has been archived.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

#1 SoxScout


  • Maalox Territory


  • 30,161 posts

Posted 10 April 2008 - 05:29 PM

NESN

#2 Quintanariffic

  • 4,416 posts

Posted 10 April 2008 - 05:34 PM

FWIW, I agreed with the notion that Thurston or Ginter was the better call, unless they are prepared to play Lowrie on a regular basis. Lowrie's performance in ST and the first week in AAA didn't exactly scream "I'm ready" in the field or at the plate, but SSS yada yada yada.

I think what this tells us clearly is that the Sox don't consider Casey (or Carter, for that matter) a viable candidate to play a lot of games at 1B if Lowell is out for an extended period of time. Surprised that Carter wasn't given the nod, now that I think about it.

#3 Cuzittt


  • Bouncing with Anger


  • 17,369 posts

Posted 10 April 2008 - 05:38 PM

Amelie Benjamin

The Red Sox just announced that Mike Lowell has been placed on the 15-day disabled list with a sprained left thumb.

Jed Lowrie has been purchased from Pawtucket, and has been placed on the roster. He'll be here for the game, wearing No. 12.

If Lowrie gets in the game, it will be his major league debut. He is not, however, in the lineup.


As for picking up Lowrie instead of Ginter/Thurston, I expect the real reason is that Lowell is going to be out longer than 15 days... and they still aren't sure about Cora's health. So, there will be plenty of actual game time for Lowrie. If the only injury was to Lowell, it may have been Ginter/Thurston... or it may have been Carter/Moss. Cora's injury complicated things (or... actually made the decision process easier).

#4 smastroyin


  • simpering whimperer


  • 16,856 posts

Posted 10 April 2008 - 05:39 PM

FWIW, I agreed with the notion that Thurston or Ginter was the better call, unless they are prepared to play Lowrie on a regular basis. Lowrie's performance in ST and the first week in AAA didn't exactly scream "I'm ready" in the field or at the plate, but SSS yada yada yada.

I think what this tells us clearly is that the Sox don't consider Casey (or Carter, for that matter) a viable candidate to play a lot of games at 1B if Lowell is out for an extended period of time. Surprised that Carter wasn't given the nod, now that I think about it.


If you call up Carter, you are left with two middle infielders if Cora is unavailable. One errant pitch and you are looking at Casey at second base or something silly like that.

#5 Quintanariffic

  • 4,416 posts

Posted 10 April 2008 - 05:44 PM

If you call up Carter, you are left with two middle infielders if Cora is unavailable. One errant pitch and you are looking at Casey at second base or something silly like that.

Fair enough. I should learn to think more before I type.

Lowrie is the only one who gives you the 2B/SS/3B flexibility you'd want in this situation. I suspect that his start at 3B this afternoon in Pawtucket was not a coincidence.

#6 RoDaddy

  • 1,286 posts

Posted 10 April 2008 - 07:21 PM

Just wondering whether it was his current Pawsox .185 BA/.280 SLG or the .098 spring traing BA that earned his callup.

#7 TheGoldenGreek33

  • 1,934 posts

Posted 10 April 2008 - 07:49 PM

Just wondering whether it was his current Pawsox .185 BA/.280 SLG or the .098 spring traing BA that earned his callup.

My guess is that it's the .900 OPS that he put up between Portland and Pawtucket. Maybe that's just me.

edit: Regardless, he'll get a feel for what playing in the majors is like while serving as a pinch-hitter/late-inning defensive replacement/spot-starter until Lowell gets back. This will be the only option used on him.

Edited by TheGoldenGreek33, 10 April 2008 - 07:51 PM.


#8 Alcohol&Overcalls

  • 1,208 posts

Posted 10 April 2008 - 10:26 PM

Just wondering whether it was his current Pawsox .185 BA/.280 SLG or the .098 spring traing BA that earned his callup.


Maybe it was because he could be optioned down, while Ginter/Thurston would have to clear waivers? Or that Lowrie is likely better than both? I'd guess a combination - no need to potentially lose a player in the deal, plus giving the kid a paycheck and maybe an at-bat or two in a blowout isn't much of a loss.

#9 SoxScout


  • Maalox Territory


  • 30,161 posts

Posted 10 April 2008 - 11:38 PM

On the drive up there were still a lot of questions, Lowrie admitted. RJ told me they wanted me to be up here just in case about 10 minutes before I got here Theo called me and told me they were going to activate me, so there were some mixed emotions driving up here because there was some uncertainty whether I was going to get the opportunity or not.

Lowrie got to Boston just in time to put on his uniform (No. 12) and make it to the dugout for game time.

I got my first taste today and ust watching from the dugout, its been a dream of mine since Ive been playing baseball," he said. "I didnt get a chance to be in there today, but it was still awesome just to be up here. Just the opportunity to help this team would be pretty awesome.

http://www.beloblog....e_makes_it.html

#10 mabrowndog


  • Ask me about total zone...or paint


  • 38,404 posts

Posted 10 April 2008 - 11:44 PM

Considering the Cora injury I have no problem whatsoever with the Lowrie callup, but the notion that the Sox might be afraid to lose Thurston or Ginter if they're called up seems a little ridiculous. Yes it's true that they're both out of options, so once Lowell returns they'd need to clear waivers before being returned to Pawtucket. It's also true that either could choose free agency instead of another minor league assignment.

But from the Sox point of view, what's the point of having experienced MLB bats and gloves in Pawtucket if you're afraid to use them because you might lose them later? Aren't they supposed to be at the Sox' disposal for a rainy day need? Are they just hanging around for a September call-up? Or are they just down there to fill out the AAA roster?

Besides, aren't both these guys the very embodiment of replacement-level players? Would it really be that difficult to fill one or the other's spot with an equivalent body?

#11 Guest_Corsi Combover_*

Posted 10 April 2008 - 11:44 PM

Sean Casey is 1-10 career vs Wang. Any chance Lowrie gets a start at 3B tomorrow?

#12 TheGoldenGreek33

  • 1,934 posts

Posted 11 April 2008 - 12:06 AM

Sean Casey is 1-10 career vs Wang. Any chance Lowrie gets a start at 3B tomorrow?

Doubt it. I don't think there's any way they have a kid who has played the vast majority of his minor league career at short to make his debut at a different position against the mfy's. I think it'd be best if he made his debut as a pinch hitter or defensive replacement. Ease him in.

Edited by TheGoldenGreek33, 11 April 2008 - 12:07 AM.


#13 Alcohol&Overcalls

  • 1,208 posts

Posted 11 April 2008 - 12:23 AM

Considering the Cora injury I have no problem whatsoever with the Lowrie callup, but the notion that the Sox might be afraid to lose Thurston or Ginter if they're called up seems a little ridiculous. Yes it's true that they're both out of options, so once Lowell returns they'd need to clear waivers before being returned to Pawtucket. It's also true that either could choose free agency instead of another minor league assignment.

But from the Sox point of view, what's the point of having experienced MLB bats and gloves in Pawtucket if you're afraid to use them because you might lose them later? Aren't they supposed to be at the Sox' disposal for a rainy day need? Are they just hanging around for a September call-up? Or are they just down there to fill out the AAA roster?

Besides, aren't both these guys the very embodiment of replacement-level players? Would it really be that difficult to fill one or the other's spot with an equivalent body?


In my mind, there are some conflicting ideas here. Ginter and Thurston are likely replacement-level ballplayers, which indeed (to my mind, anyway) makes them organizational players (filling out the AAA roster). Those aren't really in opposition, though.

Organizational guys have their own sort of value - especially if the other options are sub-replacement. Additionally, stocking replacement-level options has additional value, in that the off-chance one guy catches lightning in a bottle increases for each one - losing a player, then, detracts from that value and that depth.

Finally, above all else, there's the likely issue of Lowrie simply being better than both should he be pressed into service, even knowing he's sucked since February. The additional quote about Lowrie enjoying just being on the bench gives some possible additional, intangible value to the process - that Lowrie gets a taste and a couple bucks, while taking BP/grounders with the big-league instructors for a few days (in the middle of a slump, no less).

I agree that the reason to have these guys is because you might someday want to use them - having experienced gloves is a great fallback option in case of emergency. However, with this specific injury, it seems like this is not a "break glass" moment, because there are better options. There doesn't seem to be any downside to bringing up Lowrie, and I can't really think of anything else that Ginter would bring. I guess my point is that it's raining, but not hard enough to bring Keith Ginter out of the soil.

I also completely agree that no decisions should be made because Keith fucking Ginter might be lost in the process, but it seems like a happy confluence of events when the best possible option also includes keeping an organizational player, among other (admittedly small and speculative) positives.

Edited by Alcohol&Overcalls, 11 April 2008 - 12:26 AM.


#14 mabrowndog


  • Ask me about total zone...or paint


  • 38,404 posts

Posted 11 April 2008 - 12:50 AM

In my mind, there are some conflicting ideas here. Ginter and Thurston are likely replacement-level ballplayers, which indeed (to my mind, anyway) makes them organizational players (filling out the AAA roster). Those aren't really in opposition, though.

Organizational guys have their own sort of value - especially if the other options are sub-replacement. Additionally, stocking replacement-level options has additional value, in that the off-chance one guy catches lightning in a bottle increases for each one - losing a player, then, detracts from that value and that depth.

Finally, above all else, there's the likely issue of Lowrie simply being better than both should he be pressed into service, even knowing he's sucked since February. The additional quote about Lowrie enjoying just being on the bench gives some possible additional, intangible value to the process - that Lowrie gets a taste and a couple bucks, while taking BP/grounders with the big-league instructors for a few days (in the middle of a slump, no less).

I agree that the reason to have these guys is because you might someday want to use them - having experienced gloves is a great fallback option in case of emergency. However, with this specific injury, it seems like this is not a "break glass" moment, because there are better options. There doesn't seem to be any downside to bringing up Lowrie, and I can't really think of anything else that Ginter would bring. I guess my point is that it's raining, but not hard enough to bring Keith Ginter out of the soil.

I also completely agree that no decisions should be made because Keith fucking Ginter might be lost in the process, but it seems like a happy confluence of events when the best possible option also includes keeping an organizational player, among other (admittedly small and speculative) positives.

Good post. The line in boldface is the most reasonable argument I can imagine for NOT adding any of the non-Lowries to the 40-man and bringing them north at this point.

#15 ScubaSteveAvery


  • the goats! think of the goats!


  • 7,148 posts

Posted 11 April 2008 - 12:53 AM

I agree that the reason to have these guys is because you might someday want to use them - having experienced gloves is a great fallback option in case of emergency. However, with this specific injury, it seems like this is not a "break glass" moment, because there are better options. There doesn't seem to be any downside to bringing up Lowrie, and I can't really think of anything else that Ginter would bring. I guess my point is that it's raining, but not hard enough to bring Keith Ginter out of the soil.


I agreed with pretty much everything you said. However, regarding the bolded part, I would argue that the only downsides are that he might not getting regular playing time with the big club like he would be in Pawtucket and reps at shorstop. Like tonight, Youkilis at third, and Casey at first worked out great and there seemed to be no problems. Therefore, Lowrie (presumably) might not be playing third his entire time in the majors. Also, he most likely will not get sufficient playing time at shortstop - the position I think he needs the most reps at right now. Since he will only be up here for 2-4 weeks (I'm guessing), it doesn't present a huge problem, but regardless, I'd really like to see him get as many reps and looks as possible at short in order to (a) familiarize himself with the position and (b) so he can be evaluated further to see if he'll stick at SS.

That being said, I think what he gives the Sox is some flexibility at third and first, as opposed to always playing Youks at third and Casey at first. Lowrie also serves as a backup to Lugo and Pedroia in case anything happens to them. Again, the differences between Lowrie, Ginter, and Thurston are not really much, but the only downsides I see are consistent playing time and reps at shortstop.

Edit: grammar

Edited by ScubaSteveAvery, 11 April 2008 - 12:55 AM.


#16 TomRicardo


  • rusty cohlebone


  • 18,157 posts

Posted 11 April 2008 - 07:31 AM

Good post. The line in boldface is the most reasonable argument I can imagine for NOT adding any of the non-Lowries to the 40-man and bringing them north at this point.


Yes, I don't think Lowell is going to be on the DL more than 15 days. Cora forced the FO hand though I am surprised Lowell was put on instead of Cora.

#17 Cuzittt


  • Bouncing with Anger


  • 17,369 posts

Posted 11 April 2008 - 07:57 AM

Yes, I don't think Lowell is going to be on the DL more than 15 days. Cora forced the FO hand though I am surprised Lowell was put on instead of Cora.


Really? We know Lowell isn't going to play for at least a week (that's when the splint comes off and they re-evaluate) and is more likely would be gone for 2 weeks. Cora said he was ready to play last night. Lowell was the obvious choice.

But, you are right that Cora forced their hands. I don't think they make a decision yesterday if Cora didn't hurt himself.

#18 TomRicardo


  • rusty cohlebone


  • 18,157 posts

Posted 11 April 2008 - 08:24 AM

Really? We know Lowell isn't going to play for at least a week (that's when the splint comes off and they re-evaluate) and is more likely would be gone for 2 weeks. Cora said he was ready to play last night. Lowell was the obvious choice.

But, you are right that Cora forced their hands. I don't think they make a decision yesterday if Cora didn't hurt himself.


For me at least, one or two days without Lowell is worse than two weeks without Cora. I have a hard time believing Cora was ready to play last night. Maybe he was at 80% but ACora at 80% is not a major league player. Certainly not one I want to see on the field.

#19 Cuzittt


  • Bouncing with Anger


  • 17,369 posts

Posted 11 April 2008 - 08:30 AM

For me at least, one or two days without Lowell is worse than two weeks without Cora. I have a hard time believing Cora was ready to play last night. Maybe he was at 80% but ACora at 80% is not a major league player. Certainly not one I want to see on the field.


IF it was one or two days without Lowell, I don't think anything happens yesterday (even with Cora's twinge). It's at least 7 days before his splint comes off, and he can't play with the splint. We won't know until next week whether or not Lowell will even be back in a week from then.

I understand your general point and tend to agree. But, in this case, it looks like the best case scenario is that Lowell is out for 10 days. It's likely longer. It makes sense to DL him. [It also doesn't hurt that Youkilis can swing over to 3rd without much (if any) decline in defense and that Casey is an OK 1st Baseman.]

#20 mr guido

  • 3,112 posts

Posted 11 April 2008 - 08:40 AM

IF it was one or two days without Lowell, I don't think anything happens yesterday (even with Cora's twinge). It's at least 7 days before his splint comes off, and he can't play with the splint. We won't know until next week whether or not Lowell will even be back in a week from then.

I'm seeing stuff out there that makes the Lowell injury look reasonably serious:

"They thought at first it might be 2-to-4 weeks, so 15 days was kind of the best case," Lowell said. "I think these next three or four days are important to see how much the swelling goes down. We're in a wait-and-see for the next couple days."

(link)

My guess is that Casey sees most of the time at first, Youk at third, with Lowrie playing the Cora role while Cora is unavailable. They may be looking at this as a good chance to get Lowrie's MLB debut jitters out of the way, let him check out a Sox/Yanks series. Probably not too unlike what they did with Jacoby at the end of June last year when Coco needed a blow, but Ellsbury was sent back down 5 days later.

Then again I'm kind of surprised that Cora wasn't DLd. This doesn't sound great, and as Tom noted, 80% of Cora is not really worth much.

Cora, meanwhile, reported to Fenway for early work at third base yesterday in anticipation of Lowell being sidelined. While taking ground balls from coach Luis Alicea, however, he suddenly clutched his elbow after making a throw to first and dropped to his knees in pain. He rested for a few minutes before making a test throw, which ended horribly, striking 20 feet in front of first base and another 15 feet off the mark.

(link)

#21 86spike


  • Currently enjoying "Arli$$"


  • 22,123 posts

Posted 11 April 2008 - 09:03 AM

years ago I messed up my thumb (classic skiers thumb caused by planting a pole during a tumble). It was examined and ruled to be a sprain... no tears, no broken bones... just a sprain. That thing hurt like a biotch for a couple of weeks and didn't feel 100% for at least a month. Obviously Lowell will have access to better care and rehab than I did... but let's not just assume that his thumb will feel fine in a few days. I think he'll need the full 15 days to be ready to play.

In the meantime, we're lucky to have Youks/Casey to fill in. Lowrie's development won't be stunted by spending 2 weeks as a bench player with maybe one start thrown in for the hell of it. If they kept him sitting on the bench for a whole season, that would stunt his growth, but a few weeks is a totally different situation and one that will likely be good for him mentally.

#22 SoxScout


  • Maalox Territory


  • 30,161 posts

Posted 14 April 2008 - 04:39 PM

Jed Lowrie will be making his major league debut here tomorrow -- if he's not inserted in some capacity tonight.

Terry Francona said he's not yet sure whether Lowrie will play third base or shortstop, though he did indicate that tomorrow (against Paul Byrd) would be a good time to rest Sean Casey. That's tough to do, since Casey has been swinging a hot bat, but Casey is 3-for-21 off Byrd with two walks, two RBI, and two strikeouts. All three hits have been singles.

http://www.boston.co...ie_to_play.html

#23 Hairps

  • 1,733 posts

Posted 18 April 2008 - 01:28 PM

Mike Lowell won't come off the DL at the 15-day minimum, but it shouldn't be much longer than that. ...

http://www.baseballp...?articleid=7385

#24 LahoudOrBillyC


  • Indian name is Massages Ellsbury


  • 3,855 posts

Posted 18 April 2008 - 11:25 PM

Two questions:
1. How do you want Jed Lowrie to be used in the coming weeks?
2. How do you think he will be used?

I'd like to see him get some starts at SS, sharing time like our CFers. However, I suspect he will be sent down when Cora is ready.

#25 Bowlerman9


  • bitchslapped by Keith Law


  • 5,032 posts

Posted 18 April 2008 - 11:26 PM

Two questions:
1. How do you want Jed Lowrie to be used in the coming weeks?
2. How do you think he will be used?

I'd like to see him get some starts at SS, sharing time like our CFers. However, I suspect he will be sent down when Cora is ready.


1. Starting SS
2. Not nearly enough. Maybe a start here and there for each of the 4 IFers, but as long as he outperforms Lugo, he should be playing SS.

#26 Quintanariffic

  • 4,416 posts

Posted 18 April 2008 - 11:31 PM

1. Starting SS
2. Not nearly enough. Maybe a start here and there for each of the 4 IFers, but as long as he outperforms Lugo, he should be playing SS.


Well, I want a pony.

That ends this week's episode of "Things That Are Never Going To Happen."

Not with Tito. Not with that contract. Though you speak the truth of what SHOULD happen.

#27 Chainsaw318

  • 1,399 posts

Posted 18 April 2008 - 11:37 PM

Went to the game tonight, and paid attention specifically to Lowrie's defense at SS. The tag he seems to carry as a prospect is that he may not have the defensive skill to sitck at SS at the major league level, and that his arm may not play at 3b. I was interested in seeing him play SS.

Nothing glaringly wrong in the few plays he had to make; had one semi-bobble and bounced one throw, but it got there in time. Didn't pick up anything immediately apparent with his footwork either. He made a nice play moving across toward third and throwing on the run to get the final out.

And he made a real nice play going backward to catch a shallow fly in LF. As we all know, it is how a SS goes back on pop outs/fly balls which indicates whether he is a good fielder or not.

Anyone else have observations of Lowrie in the field thus far?

#28 Bowlerman9


  • bitchslapped by Keith Law


  • 5,032 posts

Posted 18 April 2008 - 11:54 PM

Well, I want a pony.

That ends this week's episode of "Things That Are Never Going To Happen."

Not with Tito. Not with that contract. Though you speak the truth of what SHOULD happen.


Did you even bother to read the post above mine?

#29 67WasBest


  • Concierge


  • 1,994 posts

Posted 19 April 2008 - 12:38 AM

As we all know, it is how a SS goes back on pop outs/fly balls which indicates whether he is a good fielder or not.


Is this the Captain Intangibles metric for evaluating shortstops? Jeter is among the best ever at going after pop ups, but he is still among the worst shortstops I have ever seen.

IMO, being able to go to their right, stop quickly, plant and throw; and going to their left while throwing across thier body is what defines good shortstops, especially in Fenway where the LF can take away so many of those short fly pop ups.

He looked fine for the plays we saw. Alicea is concerned about his footwork and how he sets for his throws. In my experience this has to do with getting a solid throw off with accuracy and as little up and down or side to side movement as possible, a trait highly prized by first baseman.

#30 jtn46


  • SoSH Member


  • 6,867 posts

Posted 19 April 2008 - 01:09 AM

Is this the Captain Intangibles metric for evaluating shortstops? Jeter is among the best ever at going after pop ups, but he is still among the worst shortstops I have ever seen.

I'm pretty sure it was a joke, based entirely on that premise. Obviously we didn't get much of a demonstration of Lowrie's range.

I think while it's unrealistic to think Lowrie's going to displace Lugo this season, the look we're getting at him does likely give the FO some idea on how reasonable making that move next season could be. The FO admitted they were wrong on Renteria, so I don't see why they wouldn't do the same with Lugo.

#31 OCD SS


  • SoSH Member


  • 6,850 posts

Posted 19 April 2008 - 08:55 AM

Well, I want a pony.


As an adult with a good job there is no reason, other than lack of will on your part, that you can not have a pony.

The same applies to the Red Sox. They have the financial resources to clear Lugo's space for Lowrie if they decide that's the best thing for the team. It's just a matter of following through with the unpallateable aspects of that decision.

#32 SoxFanSince57


  • Carrie Nation


  • 10,048 posts

Posted 19 April 2008 - 12:04 PM

He looked fine for the plays we saw. Alicea is concerned about his footwork and how he sets for his throws. In my experience this has to do with getting a solid throw off with accuracy and as little up and down or side to side movement as possible, a trait highly prized by first baseman.


I was pleased with the ranging catch in short LF. Fielding ground balls hit 5+ feet of either side of him means absolutely nothing to me. High schoolers could field those balls.

I agree with '67 and Alicea. Lowrie has LOTS of work to do to improve his footwork. While there haven't been enough plays to make a firm statement, I certainly saw a kid who took way too many steps to set and release his throws to 1B. Since he had plenty of time on most of the plays, it is a bit unfair to claim that he would always take too many steps to get his throws off. However, from what I saw there was no evidence I can remember that Lowrie is economical with his footwork.

I will watch again, but he took too much time with his throws. I thought his hands were fine. It was the footwork that made him look like a minor leaguer.

That said, I like his approach, attitude and maturity. If anyone can help him, I believe Alicea is the one to do it. I am a huge fan of Alicea as a fielding coach.

#33 satyadaimoku


  • wicked gunner


  • PipPip
  • 4,224 posts

Posted 19 April 2008 - 04:26 PM

The same applies to the Red Sox. They have the financial resources to clear Lugo's space for Lowrie if they decide that's the best thing for the team. It's just a matter of following through with the unpallateable aspects of that decision.

And the Red Sox have shown that they are willing to make moves like that when they are in the interests of the team. Of course, we're not going to make a move like that with a sample size of 7 at bats, and we aren't going to do it unless we're fairly convinced that Lowrie can be at least "average" defensively. But given that Lugo is such an extreme disappointment, I'd like to see Lowrie get enough starts to see if he can win the job.

(By average, I mean meet the standard expectation for a shortstop, rather than the mean or median average defensive ability of all shortstops, which is well above average).

#34 Vermonter At Large


  • SoxFan


  • 3,061 posts

Posted 20 April 2008 - 05:54 AM

Well ... barring an unlikely trade of either Lowell or Lugo in the next two seasons, Lowrie is the infield organizational depth, and that's probably as it should be. Like Youks a couple of seasons back, he'll probably spend this season shuttling back and forth between AAA and the big club as needed but barring major injuries, he probably won't get a full-time gig until the big contracts come off the books. That's just the way it works.

The real test will be with his patience and work ethic. Youks didn't take the shuttling very well, but he had the work ethic to persevere and made a niche for himself on this team. Lowrie's going to have to do much the same, really, to take the assignments they give him to either get better at shortstop or make the transition to third base and be ready when the opportunity arises. Thus far, his make-up seems to be of the right kind to make this happen.

As has been noted above, the sample size is very small, but the kid looks pretty good so far. He certainly has a part to play in the 2008 team and possibly on future teams as well and if ultimately he is destined to play somewhere else in the future, he hasn't done anything to hurt his trade value either.

#35 OCD SS


  • SoSH Member


  • 6,850 posts

Posted 20 April 2008 - 08:54 AM

And the Red Sox have shown that they are willing to make moves like that when they are in the interests of the team. Of course, we're not going to make a move like that with a sample size of 7 at bats, and we aren't going to do it unless we're fairly convinced that Lowrie can be at least "average" defensively. But given that Lugo is such an extreme disappointment, I'd like to see Lowrie get enough starts to see if he can win the job.


Why do you not take into account his minor league AB's (and defensive performance)? They are certainly a part of the data set and I would think this FO has a better understanding how they transfer to the majors than most. I don't think we disagree on the longterm, but in the short term I think Lowrie has shown that he can help the team win. He may not "Wally Pip" Lugo, but I think he's already earned more playing time.

Well ... barring an unlikely trade of either Lowell or Lugo in the next two seasons, Lowrie is the infield organizational depth, and that's probably as it should be. Like Youks a couple of seasons back, he'll probably spend this season shuttling back and forth between AAA and the big club as needed but barring major injuries, he probably won't get a full-time gig until the big contracts come off the books. That's just the way it works.


I would argue that there's no reason that's the way it should work, and that the example of Youks has been superseeded by Renteria and Coco/Ellsbury. Youks was blocked by Mueller, who was at least performing well. There's no way to know if all the shuttling hurt his development, but in 2005 Mueller had a terrible September and was continuing to play despite a lot of nagging injuries (and was agitating for that playing time, knowing that he was going to be a FA). I hope the Coco/ Ellsbury situation is closer to what we can expect, although with Coco currently injured it's hard to know how the PT will break down, but I'd be happy with Lowrie getting even a third of the starts at SS.

The two key points to me are 1) defense, and 2) the team's current financial leverage and flexibility. The difference with Lowrie from all the above examples is that his defense is a question, and is not considered to be strong at SS in any case. How many balls are they willing to let go through the IF to get his bat in the lineup? Given what the FO seems to value, I tend to think that Lowrie's glove, rather than Lugo's bat, will be what makes it hard to get playing time.

Frankly, I think this may be a place for the Sox to consider exercising their financial muscle. Philly's analysis shows that the Sox can afford to spend on some large contracts, and their aren't really all that many players who are going to be worth that money coming onto the market. Perhaps they need to flex that muscle in a different direction and use it to help unload players who are turning into blatant failures.

#36 glennhoffmania


  • likes the tomahawk chop


  • 8,384,258 posts

Posted 20 April 2008 - 10:49 AM

I'm pretty sure it was a joke, based entirely on that premise. Obviously we didn't get much of a demonstration of Lowrie's range.

I think while it's unrealistic to think Lowrie's going to displace Lugo this season, the look we're getting at him does likely give the FO some idea on how reasonable making that move next season could be. The FO admitted they were wrong on Renteria, so I don't see why they wouldn't do the same with Lugo.


I think the FO would be more than willing to pull a Renteria with Lugo. But I don't see any team being willing to take him. The Sox would have to kick in more money than they did to the Braves, and the return would be a lot less than Marte. For what team would Lugo be an upgrade at SS? Off the top of my head, maybe St. Louis and SF. Maybe.

#37 Kevin Youkulele


  • wishes Claude Makelele was a Red Sox


  • 1,664 posts

Posted 20 April 2008 - 10:55 AM

Lowrie is giving Pedroia a blow and starting at 2B today, according to Projo.
http://www.beloblog...._Blogs/SoxBlog/

#38 jtn46


  • SoSH Member


  • 6,867 posts

Posted 20 April 2008 - 11:25 AM

I think the FO would be more than willing to pull a Renteria with Lugo. But I don't see any team being willing to take him. The Sox would have to kick in more money than they did to the Braves, and the return would be a lot less than Marte. For what team would Lugo be an upgrade at SS? Off the top of my head, maybe St. Louis and SF. Maybe.

Lugo played second for awhile too, which makes him a little more versatile...maybe add San Diego and Houston to the list of potential trade partners.

I think they'll have a ton of trouble trading him anyways. He's having a bad season, he's coming off a bad season. He's got another 3 seasons on his deal, including a vesting option that adds a 4th season if his new team actually plays him.

Lugo will get most of this season to work things out. The Sox could play a 50/50 platoon with Cora or with Lowrie, which would probably require dumping Cora.

#39 amarshal2

  • 2,718 posts

Posted 20 April 2008 - 11:58 AM

I think the issue is that Lowrie hasn't proved he'll be better than Lugo over the course of a season yet. I'm pretty confident he'd be better offensively right now, but the total package is uncertain with his defense. (Plus, I'm in the group who thinks Lugo is an above average defensive SS.) I think he'll spend the majority of the summer in AAA this year and if he's able to prove that he'd be the slam dunk better option, then Lugo will be moved to make room.

#40 glennhoffmania


  • likes the tomahawk chop


  • 8,384,258 posts

Posted 20 April 2008 - 12:40 PM

Lugo played second for awhile too, which makes him a little more versatile...maybe add San Diego and Houston to the list of potential trade partners.


Good point. I forgot about that. As for Houston, I'd still take Matsui over Lugo though, assuming his ass has properly healed.

#41 Guest_Corsi Combover_*

Posted 20 April 2008 - 03:25 PM

Pretty sure Tito just said Lowrie will start at 3B tomorrow.

#42 knucklecup


  • hi, I'm a cuckold


  • 4,236 posts

Posted 20 April 2008 - 03:29 PM

Pretty sure Tito just said Lowrie will start at 3B tomorrow.

Sean Casey hasn't been bad by any means, but I'm really enjoying seeing what this Lowrie kid can do.

#43 satyadaimoku


  • wicked gunner


  • PipPip
  • 4,224 posts

Posted 20 April 2008 - 03:37 PM

Pretty sure Tito just said Lowrie will start at 3B tomorrow.

It certainly isn't because Casey doesn't deserve to start. Seems like a sign to me that Tito is trying to give Lowrie as much of a shot to win the SS job as possible.

J Ellsbury singled to left.
J Lowrie doubled to right, J Ellsbury scored.
C Wilson relieved W Littleton.
D Ortiz singled to shallow right, J Lowrie scored.
D Pedroia hit for J Thurston.
D Pedroia doubled to deep center, D Ortiz scored, D Pedroia to third on throwing error by center fielder J Hamilton.

It's a thing of beauty, isn't it?

#44 SoxScout


  • Maalox Territory


  • 30,161 posts

Posted 20 April 2008 - 04:17 PM

Francona said it was simply to give Casey a rest because of the quick turnaround in game time.

#45 Steve Dillard


  • wishes drew noticed him instead of sweet & sour


  • 3,679 posts

Posted 20 April 2008 - 04:21 PM

It's a thing of beauty, isn't it?


Of course, if his name was Jeff Lugo, we'd be killing him for (1) popping to short with 1 out and runner on 3rd and(2) k'ing with one out and runner on 3rd. Two chances to bring a guy in with solid contact, and he didn't.

But he's just using up the tip of the "anti-Lugo" reserve that's built up.

#46 tims4wins


  • PN23's replacement


  • 7,016 posts

Posted 20 April 2008 - 05:27 PM

It certainly isn't because Casey doesn't deserve to start. Seems like a sign to me that Tito is trying to give Lowrie as much of a shot to win the SS job as possible.

Also, they're facing a lefty (Gabbard), so it's not a bad idea to give Casey that day off. I also wouldn't be surprised to see Coco in there for either Drew or Jacoby.

Did anyone else find it extremely interesting that they put Lugo into left in the 9th? They could have easily put Lowrie at 3rd, left Lugo at short, and moved Youks, who has more experience playing left in Fenway than Lugo, to left. Instead, they moved Lugo to left and left Lowrie at short. Shortstop is obviously a much more important defensive position than left field, especially in Fenway. If the Sox were at all concerned about Lowrie's defense at short, they'd have left Lugo there, moved Lowrie to third, and moved Youks to left. That they didn't was a good sign to me. Or am I making too much out of it?

#47 Mystic Merlin


  • SoSH Member


  • 21,959 posts

Posted 20 April 2008 - 05:29 PM

Also, they're facing a lefty (Gabbard), so it's not a bad idea to give Casey that day off. I also wouldn't be surprised to see Coco in there for either Drew or Jacoby.

Did anyone else find it extremely interesting that they put Lugo into left in the 9th? They could have easily put Lowrie at 3rd, left Lugo at short, and moved Youks, who has more experience playing left in Fenway than Lugo, to left. Instead, they moved Lugo to left and left Lowrie at short. Shortstop is obviously a much more important defensive position than left field, especially in Fenway. If the Sox were at all concerned about Lowrie's defense at short, they'd have left Lugo there, moved Lowrie to third, and moved Youks to left. That they didn't was a good sign to me. Or am I making too much out of it?


I think Francona was moreso concerned with the outfield defense and, as good a corner IF as Youkilis is, he would be a liability in LF. Putting Lugo in left made the most since, simply because of Lugo's superior range.

#48 tims4wins


  • PN23's replacement


  • 7,016 posts

Posted 20 April 2008 - 05:32 PM

I think Francona was moreso concerned with the outfield defense and, as good a corner IF as Youkilis is, he would be a liability in LF. Putting Lugo in left made the most since, simply because of Lugo's superior range.

I can't disagree with the range argument... I guess what it comes down to is that Tito must have felt that the advantage that Lugo gave them over Youks in left more than offset the difference between Lugo and Lowrie at short... which, given the defensive importance of shortstop, shows a lot of confidence in Lowrie's defensive ability and may, just may, be a sign that Tito might be willing to give Lowrie more of a shot at short in the future. Maybe.

#49 Vermonter At Large


  • SoxFan


  • 3,061 posts

Posted 20 April 2008 - 08:28 PM

I can't disagree with the range argument... I guess what it comes down to is that Tito must have felt that the advantage that Lugo gave them over Youks in left more than offset the difference between Lugo and Lowrie at short... which, given the defensive importance of shortstop, shows a lot of confidence in Lowrie's defensive ability and may, just may, be a sign that Tito might be willing to give Lowrie more of a shot at short in the future. Maybe.

Well ... I wouldn't read too much into this. Papelbon's G/F ratio is something like 0.7 so it's not like he stresses his shortstops a whole lot :lol:

#50 mabrowndog


  • Ask me about total zone...or paint


  • 38,404 posts

Posted 23 April 2008 - 12:15 PM

Looks like Mike will be back in about a week.

MLB.com

In taking his first BP swings since going on the disabled list, Lowell looked to be in good form and not favoring his sprained left thumb in the least.

If things continue to progress well for Lowell, he could play in Minor League games by this weekend.

Just by the logic of looking at the calendar, Lowell could be activated by April 29, when the Sox open their next homestand against the Blue Jays.

"He looked great," said Red Sox manager Terry Francona. "I was waiting to have him kind of nurse the bat through the zone. He looked great. Again, how he responds to that is important. But he really did look good. I was very impressed. I was very pleased. He looked terrific."