AJP gets exorcised and Christian Vazquez up. Starts tonight
- Thread starter RedOctober3829
- Start date
"From the dugout, he would yell across the field at the opposition, or ridicule umpires during replay challenges. It made many cringe. This wasn't the Red Sox way"
The Red Sox way, don't ridicule the ump, just bash a telephone with a bat. Don't yell at David price from the dugout for throwing at Carp, politely ask him to stop!
The Red Sox way, don't ridicule the ump, just bash a telephone with a bat. Don't yell at David price from the dugout for throwing at Carp, politely ask him to stop!
He was a one-year rental stopgap. And they just DFA'd him before the all-star break. Realistically, what was Farrell supposed to do and was it worth it? He really wasn't a cancer if his attitude didn't spread.Rudy Pemberton said:
Answers to your questions:Rudy Pemberton said:
1. DFA
2. In his office, in the clubhouse and in the dugout (when not at home).
3. DFA
4. AJP didn't fit in because he was self centered and abrasive and a hacker who didn't hit. That is why he was DFA'd
AJP memory for me is the key hit he got against the Braves in the Memorial Day game that ended the 10 game losing streak. It was a SOSH bash, too.
Plympton91 said:
You know what, sport? Take the rest of the season off if it bothers you that much. If winning another WS title a mere 9 months ago isn't enough to salve your emotional wounds from a down year this year, you're probably in dire need of a baseball sabbatical.
AJP is likely a good man who has had a pretty fine career in the game. The Red Sox wanted a relatively inexpensive bridge to the youngsters, but their tough year made them want to cut bait and play the young guy. It was a reasonable decision six months ago, but the situation changed. The rest is all bullshit.
Plympton91 said:
Unlike the Bobby V era where there wasn't a single positive, this is a positive for the team. It's better than being miserable but I doubt you would know anything about that.
For those interested in the holy grail research going on to try and quantify team chemistry, I tought the following article was interesting. Probably the topic for another thread... In any event, glad to see the Sox cut bait on this guy.
http://blog.philbirnbaum.com/2014/03/espn-on-clubhouse-chemistry.html
http://blog.philbirnbaum.com/2014/03/espn-on-clubhouse-chemistry.html
Bone Chips said:
There are enough stories about upticks (or downticks) in player performance based on being traded to new clubs, experiencing different levels of media attention, etc. I don't think many people discount the idea that "environment" can impact an individual player's performance. Perhaps we should think of "chemistry" is just one factor in the overall environment. DFAing AJP seems like it may have made the environment better for some players. On a team stacked with rookies, it may very well be addition by subtraction.
Is this season starting to remind anyone else, just a little bit, of the 1987 season. Sure the Sox won last year, and only came very, very close in '86, and '87 was also very disappointing, but the '87 team turned into a transiiton year too. NESN had it on last night, but the Sox started 5 rookies in one game in 1987. "87 started the Mike Greewell, Todd Benzidinger, Ellis Burks and our own Sam Horn's era. '87 turned out to also be a train wreck, but they won the east two out of the next three years after that.
Me too, but the answer to your question is "yes". That is the product of 3 championships in 10 years. And a FO with an explicit mission statement of making the playoffs more often than not.BosRedSox5 said:
Which is why I am amused to see mock trades of players of real value get the "value" blessing -- sure, if you can get a too 50 prospect, why not?
I tell you why not. We don't have the stomach for it, nor should we because the team fortunately does not have to live this way. And the FO does not have the balls to walk this high wire -- prospects uber alles -- without a net, and wisely so. Most prospects strike out, even high ones.
Corsi said:
Nope, nor was i in a coma in 2012 - so in two out of three seasons when everything didn't go right they completely melted down. Lets add-on the last month of 2011 and it paints a pretty dysfunctional picture. In the season where everything aligned perfectly - 2013 - they rolled beautifully with the momentum and i enjoyed every second of it. I don't think the success in 2013 unambiguously refutes the point in any way.
I'm guessing the front office and the players knew what they were getting in AJ. Sort of a "he's an asshole, but he's our asshole" and while he might be abrasive to opponents, umps, etc. he wouldn't be abrasive to his teammates within the confines of the locker room and team dynamic. You take that type of player, throw him on a team that is A. winning, B. high in team chemistry, and C. expected to compete in 2014, and you've got a player that is worth taking a chance on as a 1 year bridge.
I'm sure the front office had at least considered where we are today....essentially asking, what if the rookies don't adjust like we expect, a few veterans get hurt, and we find ourselves out of it in July. How do we think he'll act then? They got their answer, and I doubt cutting him under this scenario wasn't unforeseen. I'm sure a DFA for AJ was something they anticipated if things played out like they have. I doubt this was a surprise to anyone in the Sox front office or to AJ and his agent. Hell they probably would have cut him just to get a look at Vazquez if they felt we were out of it.
I'm sure the front office had at least considered where we are today....essentially asking, what if the rookies don't adjust like we expect, a few veterans get hurt, and we find ourselves out of it in July. How do we think he'll act then? They got their answer, and I doubt cutting him under this scenario wasn't unforeseen. I'm sure a DFA for AJ was something they anticipated if things played out like they have. I doubt this was a surprise to anyone in the Sox front office or to AJ and his agent. Hell they probably would have cut him just to get a look at Vazquez if they felt we were out of it.
esfr said:
I'd grant a dysfunctional atmosphere in 2012 and place that blame solely on one guy. I'm writing off your 2011 meltdown as not dysfunctional, rather, just shitty luck and the Rays over performing. This season hasn't seen any dysfunction other than the offense not hitting. Irrespective of offense being down across baseball, injuries and poor performance from a number of key contributors are not indicators of dysfunction. They are simply poor performance at the plate.
I think you are grasping at media driven straws especially given the results of last season.
Not that I don't like a good AJP bashing but could he really have been sitting at his locker on his phone during the game?
Even in a game you aren't playing in that doesn't sound reasonable(I know "Chicken and Beer"), I think this was pre or post game and the issue was he wasn't interacting with his team. I just can't imagine him lasting this long it he really did that during a game as a postion player.
Even in a game you aren't playing in that doesn't sound reasonable(I know "Chicken and Beer"), I think this was pre or post game and the issue was he wasn't interacting with his team. I just can't imagine him lasting this long it he really did that during a game as a postion player.
Brianish said:
I noticed after I posted it that I had. I like him a lot, but I don't know where he plays. He seems just awful in the outfield, blocked at 2B, might not have the arm for 3B or SS... I think if we were to try and trade for a good hitting outfielder or a #2 or #3 starter that he and/or Coyle might be on the move.
The Gray Eagle said:
The Red Sox currently have a well-earned reputation for negatively spinning player/manager exits: The Smearly Departed.
LuckyBen said:
David Ross screaming at the umpire a few weeks ago? Papi whining about his contract, PEDs, travel schedule, and official scorers? Jon Lester getting dizzy about-facing his posture on contract negotiations? Lackey calling out opponents?
AJP was a jerk, but there's still a lot of unflattering behavior that is still tolerated and enabled among the remaining champions. We (/Cafardo!) are just conveniently ignoring a lot of it based on past contributions.
Rudy Pemberton said:
There was an article in the Globe about a month ago where AJP mentioned a meeting he had with Farrell to "clear the air" about a few things. The framing of the article made it seem like he was having trouble fitting in, and that this was impacting his performance. So I think the Sox were trying to do some things behind the scenes, out of the public eye (as they should) to address the situation, and it just didn't work out.
If the move is well-received in the clubhouse, then great. If they start to play better, then great. But AJP is a little too convenient to blame for all the other shenanigans and on-field failure that has transpired.
You need to remember that most fans were prepared for this type of season in 2013 - a "bridge year" in which some rookies would be integrated into the major league roster, and immediate results on the field would take a backseat to longterm player development. Realistic expectations were that we wouldn't have a playoff-calibur team for a few years. But the stars aligned, and we won it all last year. That didn't mean the player development wouldn't continue into this year.esfr said:
The on-field suck of this season is different than that of 9/2011 and 2012. Those were injured, overpaid, underperforming teams led (in 2012) by a moron that made everything worse. This year has seen a combination of underperformance and a ton of growing pains for rookie players.
Bosoxfan5034 said:
By this point, the term "bridge year" has been completely stretched, bent out of shape, and distorted to the point where it no longer has a recognizable definition. I'm pretty sure that, originally, the phrase was not intended to mean the bolded above, but rather the opposite - that rookies would be integrated, but short- and middle-term veterans would be acquired so that the team could compete while integrating developing young players.
I don't mean to single you out at all. I understand many of us, and fans and the media, now equate the term "bridge year" with something like what you are saying, basically a white flag that near term success takes a back seat to long-term development. It just seems worth mentioning again that use of this term is problematic, especially since it can be taken, even with good intentions, to have two opposite meanings.
BosRedSox5 said:
I think it's a bit early to draw conclusions about his outfield play one way or the other. He just played his first games there last month, while adjusting to a new level (and that was before he even hit the majors). Most of the reports on him say that he's coachable, so it's not unreasonable to expect some improvement, especially since Fenway is such a tough RF to play.
Puffy said:
I think there's a bit of a false dichotomy there. The two bolded bits are not necessarily contradictory. I think what "bridge year" means is that:
1) you have young players in the pipeline who you anticipate will be major contributors soon, but aren't yet;
2) in order to avoid blocking those players, you are forgoing opportunities to fill their roster slots with big-name, big-money players;
3) instead, you are filling those slots with short-term solutions who are (hopefully) average-or-better, but aren't as good as the guys you passed on, nor as good as the ceilings of the guys they're holding a spot for;
4) you recognize that in the short term this is slightly depressing (though certainly not eliminating) your team's championship chances;
5) you're willing to accept this short-term dip as a strategic investment that will pay off in the form of a very strong, very flexible roster that can compete for a championship nearly every year in the medium-to-long-term.
I've been thinking that exact thought for a few weeks now. Very similar.Papo The Snow Tiger said:
Disagree. I think he stays because, while they do have solid depth, they don't really have anyone in the pipeline with Mookie's offensive profile: High BA/OBP, great contact, speed and instincts on the bases. And some of his struggles on the outfield are likely improved with experience. And the guy blocking him may be injury prone.BosRedSox5 said:
There seems to be a strong linkage in this thread between the team's performance and AJP letting go. I wonder if they would have DFA'd him at this point if he had the same performance but they had a significantly better record?
Hard to say. Winning makes annoyances easier to deal with. On the other hand, he killed his share of rallies. It does, however, sound like he was a remarkably bad fit for a clubhouse that is built around everyone talking to everyone else about baseball all the time.
Hard to say. Winning makes annoyances easier to deal with. On the other hand, he killed his share of rallies. It does, however, sound like he was a remarkably bad fit for a clubhouse that is built around everyone talking to everyone else about baseball all the time.
Savin Hillbilly said:
I see your point and can go along with this. I've seen interpretations both here and elsewhere running between both ends of the (admittedly exaggerated) dichotomy I presented. Some take the term "bridge year" with much less sophistication than you. Personally, I object to the term being understood in the pejorative sense is sometimes heard in common parlance.
Papo The Snow Tiger said:
Certainly. And to a lesser extent, the pitching staff turnover (Workman, De La Rosa and possibly others) is similar to what happened in 1984, as Clemens, Boyd, Hurst and Nipper were all allowed to sort it out for a large part of the season while Detroit ran away and hid with the division. This helped lead to success in 1986.
Not to get off track, but I agree with your perception of a bridge year (short- and mid-term veterans, rookies), and I think that's exactly what the team did going into 2013. The results were obviously a best-case scenario, but I feel that this year they continued the approach and instead got a near-worst case scenario (underperforming veterans and 3/5 of the rotation, rookie struggles). I didn't mean to imply that a bridge year is a white-flag year by default, just that a year like 2014 is very possible.Puffy said:
Maybe AJP wasn't a cancer, but he certainly did nothing to endear himself to his teammates. I thought Bradford's article was a good insight into how that happened; I don't have a problem with it. If AJP is upset about it, he should have spent less time texting about it in the dugout. And there is no rule that what happens in the dugout is sacrosant.
Having said that, it was his performance (or lack thereof) that resulted in his being DFA'd. His demeanor didn't do him any favors, other than that it's possible they may have waited a week longer to see if there would be any team interested in his services before the DFA had he been a David Ross character.
Having said that, it was his performance (or lack thereof) that resulted in his being DFA'd. His demeanor didn't do him any favors, other than that it's possible they may have waited a week longer to see if there would be any team interested in his services before the DFA had he been a David Ross character.
His terrible approach at the plate aside, if the pitchers didn't like throwing to him (especially Lester,) that's enough of a reason for me.
Van Everyman said:
That's a ridiculous strawman.
Criticizing Bradford's piece is not a defense of AJ. In fact, almost everyone taking issue with Bradford's article goes of of their way to say that they are not defending AJ.
The man was a world-class douchebag for 16 seasons before signing with the Red Sox. How can anyone be surprised that he was still a douchebag once he got here?
I keep thinking about how important catchers are behind the scene and how many catchers in MLB are publicly praised by their team mates and beat writers. We could develop a really long list.
In 4 months of baseball, I can't recall many (or any, really) good words about AJP.
Except, "goodbye".
In 4 months of baseball, I can't recall many (or any, really) good words about AJP.
Except, "goodbye".
I heard that one also on one of the KNBR sports talk programs. My version was a little spicier. The pitcher came up to AJ and asked if they could go over the opposing team's hitters of that day. AJ told him to go F himself. I look forward however to AJ being a post season contributor on one of the networks. He's pretty good at that.Lars The Wanderer said:
Sometimes the public/media-created image of a player really just isn't fair or accurate.
Other times, though....and this seems to be one of those 'other times'
Other times, though....and this seems to be one of those 'other times'
Reverend said:
They are 2-0 A.A.J.
I think they would have been as likely to release him, if not more likely, if they were in the thick of things especially with his lack of production. If they thought Vazquez would be an improvement, especially when one game could have made the difference, I think they make the same move.
It's too bad; I wanted them to try my idea of fining FAJP $5,000 for every first pitch he swung at to see if he'd have any money at the end of the year. That clause should be in all of his forthcoming contracts.
