and given Manny's defensive liabilities, signing a 39 yo guy that can only DH or play LF seems not only shortsighted, but very much against the flexibility the team seems to go for.
Edited by Seels, 19 December 2010 - 09:36 AM.
Yo! You're not logged in. Why am I seeing this ad?
Posted 19 December 2010 - 09:35 AM
Edited by Seels, 19 December 2010 - 09:36 AM.
Posted 19 December 2010 - 10:07 AM
Posted 19 December 2010 - 10:16 AM
Because we already have Papi's platoon partner. His name is Mike Cameron. He hits LHP as well as Manny at this point, but unlike Manny can actually play the outfield when needed. I can't see what Manny would bring to the team that Cameron doesn't already have covered.OK. Tell me why I am nuts.
Posted 19 December 2010 - 10:21 AM
Because we already have Papi's platoon partner. His name is Mike Cameron. He hits LHP as well as Manny at this point, but unlike Manny can actually play the outfield when needed. I can't see what Manny would bring to the team that Cameron doesn't already have covered.
Posted 19 December 2010 - 10:32 AM
1) That's what Darnell McDonald is for--he's a better defensive player than Manny, which gives Tito more versatility (he could, if he wished, sit two LHH OF's and leave Papi in the lineup against a particular LHP), and will cost much less;OK. So against LHP Cameron starts at DH and you have all three LHH outfielders? Less than ideal right? In other words, what Manny would address is that Cameron can't play four positions against LHP.
Posted 19 December 2010 - 10:42 AM
Posted 19 December 2010 - 10:46 AM
Posted 19 December 2010 - 11:20 AM
1) That's what Darnell McDonald is for--he's a better defensive player than Manny, which gives Tito more versatility (he could, if he wished, sit two LHH OF's and leave Papi in the lineup against a particular LHP), and will cost much less;
2) Realistically, there's no way Tito is going to do a straight platoon with any of the LHH--not Drew or Ortiz, and certainly not Ellsbury or Crawford. At most, you might see Ortiz sit for about 30 games vs. LHP, and about the same or less for Drew.
In short, Manny would be overkill, and awkwardly inflexible overkill at that.
Edited by EdRalphRomero, 19 December 2010 - 11:23 AM.
Posted 19 December 2010 - 11:34 AM
JD Drew's line against lefties in 2010: .208/.302/.309
David Ortiz same: .222/.275/.324
Carl Crawford same: .256/.312/.384
I would argue that represents a big enough problem for a large enough section of your line-up that you need to address it with more than Cameron and Darnell. And I would likewise argue that it may merit carrying another position player and giving up that extra bullpen binky as well.
Posted 19 December 2010 - 11:49 AM
Wouldn't Manny basically be Mike Lowell redux? An overpriced and diminished right handed hitter who you want to have no part in playing defensively. Except I can't picture Manny being anywhere near as professional as Lowell was with a part-time role.OK. So against LHP Cameron starts at DH and you have all three LHH outfielders? Less than ideal right? In other words, what Manny would address is that Cameron can't play four positions against LHP.
Posted 19 December 2010 - 11:59 AM
Posted 19 December 2010 - 12:32 PM
JD Drew's line against lefties in 2010: .208/.302/.309
David Ortiz same: .222/.275/.324
Carl Crawford same: .256/.312/.384
I would argue that represents a big enough problem for a large enough section of your line-up that you need to address it with more than Cameron and Darnell. And I would likewise argue that it may merit carrying another position player and giving up that extra bullpen binky as well.
Posted 19 December 2010 - 12:44 PM
Posted 19 December 2010 - 01:07 PM
Four Lugos? Isn't that a tad over-dramatic? Ortiz vs lefties won't be pretty, no question. Drew struggled last year, but historically has not been that bad vs lefties. So that's two. Crawford's career OPS vs lefties is .697 (.702 in 2010). Not good, but hardly cringe-worthy either.The fact we may start four Lugoes against lefties worries me.
Posted 19 December 2010 - 01:28 PM
Posted 19 December 2010 - 01:30 PM
I don't think Ellsbury will be very good. You can save this post as a bookmark, and drill me with it later if he has a good year.
Posted 19 December 2010 - 01:45 PM
Posted 19 December 2010 - 01:55 PM
Four Lugos? Isn't that a tad over-dramatic? Ortiz vs lefties won't be pretty, no question. Drew struggled last year, but historically has not been that bad vs lefties. So that's two. Crawford's career OPS vs lefties is .697 (.702 in 2010). Not good, but hardly cringe-worthy either.
Where are you getting four?
Posted 19 December 2010 - 02:19 PM
Posted 19 December 2010 - 04:12 PM
And you do think Francona is going to consistently run four players out there who are crappy against lefties in spite of having players much better against lefties on his bench.
I think when it comes down to it, the players who hit better against lefties are going to see more plate appearances against lefties than the players who don't.
Edited by reggiecleveland, 19 December 2010 - 04:18 PM.
Posted 19 December 2010 - 09:31 PM
I know this has been discussed (and largely discarded) but can someone tell me why it wouldn't make sense for the Red Sox to take a run at Manny?
The Pros:
In a (for him) terrible year in 2010 he still put up a .298/.409/.460 line
I think we can all agree that the Sox biggest area of offensive concern is hitting LHP. Despite having a reverse split last year, Manny has traditionally hit lefties better than righties.
This would be an opportunity for the Sox to reform the relationship with Manny and avoid all the awkwardness and talk as he goes into HOF, etc
Manny could platton with Papi (That probably goes down as one of the weirdest sentences I have ever written) and serve as bat off bench and (hopefully) occasional left fielder.
The Cons:
Mysterious groin injury
39 years old
Scott Boras
Declining offensive skills
I heard there was some unpleasantness when he left Boston
Despite his weird threats to retire, it also seems that he wants a deal which will set him up to try to get a multi year deal (Manny logic). Will he want to be a part-time player?
There doesn't seem to be much of a market for him. I just saw him on a list of players likely to not have deals by ST. Of course Boras has a long list of mystery teams. Obviously, the key to all of this would be the fact that the Sox would be able to bring him back, but would not be nearly as dependent on him and therefore would not be as prone to "death by Manny." He strikes me as exactly the type of player the Red Sox payroll should allow them to add. They can afford the risk and can reap the potential upside. This is a team that runs itself as a business first and foremost. I certainly understand that Manny's past behavior needs to be taken into the equation, but a grudge should not.
OK. Tell me why I am nuts.
Posted 20 December 2010 - 03:40 PM
Posted 20 December 2010 - 06:01 PM
Kinda surprised the Sox never appeared interested in Fields. As a last guy on the bench, potential PPP type he seems a better fit than McDonald (due to being able to back up multiple positions). Anyway, guess the moment has passed...Some updates via twitter:
- Josh Fields to the Bucs. The PPP reservoir is drying out, but of course, I doubt now whether the Sox make any additional moves in that direction anyway...
- And Crain gets 3/13 from the White Sox. Really, I think Jenks at 2/12 is going to be a much, much better signing.
Edited by kazuneko, 21 December 2010 - 02:55 AM.
Posted 20 December 2010 - 06:08 PM
Kinda surprised the Sox never appeared interested in Fields. As a last guy in the bench, potential PPP type he seems a better fit than McDonald (due to being able to back up multiple positions). Anyway, guess the moment has passed...
Posted 21 December 2010 - 04:26 PM
The Angels have not given up their pursuit of free-agent third baseman Adrian Beltre, major-league sources say.
However, the team thus far is unwilling to meet agent Scott Boras' price, as related by baseball executives — five years in the $85 to $90 million range, or even a six-year deal with a comparable salary.
The Angels have offered Beltre a five-year contract in the $70 million range, one source said.
Posted 22 December 2010 - 03:06 AM
Rosenthal: The Angels have offered Beltre a five-year contract in the $70 million range, one source said.
Posted 22 December 2010 - 10:27 AM
C'mon Rockies!!But what is the Mystery Team® offering?
"I would have to say in my years of doing this, I've never had so much interest in one player," said Boras. "I'm not sure the media quite understands what Boston did for Adrian Beltre. But I think his leadership has come to surface. We've had a number of teams contact us, vastly more than we ever expected. We expected a good number certainly, but there are teams wanting to move players to make room for him."
Yup.
Posted 12 February 2011 - 04:04 PM
Edited by sachilles, 12 February 2011 - 04:16 PM.
Posted 12 February 2011 - 04:14 PM
Don't you mean we'll have to weight for Monday's photographs?Merely a side note.
...on who gained and who lost wait over the off season...
...
I'm sure the photos will start filtering in on Monday.
Posted 12 February 2011 - 04:18 PM
Posted 12 February 2011 - 06:11 PM
The 2011 Yankee offseason really is the gift that keeps on giving, isn't it?MFY's Sabathia and Chamberlain were amongst the folks mentioned as reporting in with extra pounds.
Posted 12 February 2011 - 06:29 PM
The CC thread in SOSH Yankeeland said he'd lost 30 or maybe 15 pounds. Need a picture to settle this.Merely a side note.
The MLB network program "Hot Stove" just did a quick segment on who gained and who lost weight over the off season.
Lackey was the only Red Sox named; he lost 15 lbs. Complete with a picture of him on the mound looking rather svelte. Like all the spring training pictures, he was in a t-shirt rather than a uniform, altering the normal view.
Beckett's gutt was not available for comment.
MFY's Sabathia and Chamberlain were amongst the folks mentioned as reporting in with extra pounds.
I'm sure the photos will start filtering in on Monday.
Posted 13 February 2011 - 12:16 AM
The CC thread in SOSH Yankeeland said he'd lost 30 or maybe 15 pounds. Need a picture to settle this.
Posted 13 February 2011 - 01:32 AM
Posted 13 February 2011 - 03:58 PM
Posted 15 February 2011 - 08:08 PM
This NY Post article:
http://www.nypost.co...1BPJGfWNgzFEJtN
...says that he lost weight to help ease the burden on his knees. He is still a big man regardless, but I don't think that he has gotten heavier this winter.
Edited by The Boomer, 15 February 2011 - 08:08 PM.
Posted 15 February 2011 - 08:24 PM
I heard an interesting discussion on my XM car radio today. Soriano isn't the only Yankees fireballer who can opt out of his contract after this season. Apparently CC has that player option. They were criticizing the Yankees for giving out these contracts. To retain either or both of these pitchers if they perform well, they will pay an even greater premium. That sounds like a lose-lose proposition. If they disappoint, you grossly overpay but, if they just match expectations, you are probably forced to make them the highest paid players at what they do just to retain them. Soriano could be important going forward with Rivera, at his age, possibly becoming the 2010 version of Trevor Hoffman in any season going forward.
Posted 17 February 2011 - 09:55 PM
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users