Guapos Toenails said:Somebody asked upthread about how he looks in BP...a few years ago when he had that horrific start, his BP was horrific as well. I shot some video of one of his BPs and he could hardly get the ball to the warning track. It was really noticeable how bad his BPs were.
This year his BPs have been just fine. Hitting bombs. One slight difference I noticed was for a game or two on the last homestand he changed his spot in the BP order. He usually hits in the last group, but he moved up a group.
Anyway, just some observations, probably doesn't mean anything.
vadertime said:At this point you almost have to only start Ortiz 2-3 times a week, regardless of its a lefty or right starter. At the current pace is option is going to vest in late July and there is no way in hell we can have that black hole in our lineup again next year. Its been a nice ride, but the end is near.
We all know what the Patriots would do. Yes, I understand Papi is an icon. At the end of day you have to do what is best for the team and only Cherington can make that call.
If the Red Sox thought the 72 at bats were only a blip, they wouldn't be sitting him or giving him a two day breather.DrewDawg said:
Because of 72 shitty ABs against lefties? Again, that's ALL it is right now.
Yeah, they'd cut him, like they did with Brady when he struggled early last season.
grimshaw said:If the Red Sox thought the 72 at bats were only a blip, they wouldn't be sitting him or giving him a two day breather.
Less infallible than us here in SOSH, I would sincerely hope.DrewDawg said:
Because the Sox coaching and management is infallible?
Rudy Pemberton said:Fucking with Ortiz to make sure his option doesn't vest would be the cherry on top of this shit sundae of a season. Why didn't he PH instead of de Aza? Ortiz can't play against lefties, but Sandoval can? Come on; this organization pisses away tens of millions every year but we are suddenly convinced that having Ortiz on next years team would cripple them and need to limit his plate appearances?
If they've concluded that they don't want his contract to vest, than they should do the right thing and move him before it gets ugly (beaus wit will) and they tarnish another relationship with a franchise legend.
glennhoffmania said:
It's not the salary that's the main issue. It's the roster and lineup spot. If he's on the team he's going to play, and if he sucks it'll be at the expense of a better hitter and the team. I wouldn't purposely limit his PAs if he's hitting, but I also wouldn't continue to give him full-time PAs just so his deal vests if he continues to suck.
Plympton91 said:
If the roster and lineup spot is the problem, then the problem is that Pablo Sandoval is aging in dog years and Hanley Ramirez isn't adjusting to LF. Move one of them, or better yet but too late, don't blow the money on both of them when you only needed one in the first place.
And you'd have to twist a lot of stats to convince me that Pablo Sandoval is a better hitter than Ortiz, I don't think it is at all a foregone conclusion that Ortiz's lineup spot otherwise be going to a better hitter. If we're leaving contracts and reputation out of the discussion, then Pablo's the one on the bench, with Ortiz DH and Ramirez at 3B.
Plympton91 said:
Rudy has it right, the whole time SOSH has been preaching about how forward thinking this organization is about payroll flexibility and WAR per dollar, they have wasted tens of millions of dollars a year on short-term supposedly less risky contracts to crappy players like Breslow, Ogando, Mujica and Masterson, while letting superstars walk over a difference of $2 million a year in AAV.
glennhoffmania said:
Did you notice all of the ifs in my post? If Ortiz is hitting well, or better than the alternatives, then there's no problem. A problem arises if Ortiz is in fact toast but he's on the roster for another year and a half.
Plympton91 said:
But why would you think that Ortiz is toast when he has a perfectly normal OPS against right handed pitching? If for some reason he's suddenly lost all ability to hit LHers, the worst case scenario is that he's a platoon DH. The worst case scenario with Sandoval is that he eats his way out of the league before year 3 of his current contract.
moondog80 said:
Cherry picking.
Plympton91 said:
What's referencing a partial season ERA without checking BABip and HR/FB rates? Alex.
Lester's BABip is .347, he's only been supported with 2 DPs, and his HR to FB is up a tick from career norms. His xFIP is 3.21 vs. 3.10 last year.
I wasn't really talking about any specific player, nor really limiting my focus to just re-signing their own free agents, though my wording certainly wasn't clear on that latter part.
The Mort Report said:I can't think of a time the MLBPA ever made a peep about any playing time situations. Sure they can point to the option vesting, but they didn't make that much noise about Bryant which is a bigger issue. He is playing at below replacement level, what justification would they have?
threecy said:So in other words, his legacy is so important that he should be allowed to be marched out there as a subpar player indefinitely (thus tarnishing said legacy)?
Perhaps if the Sox had given Jim Rice every chance he needed to right himself, he too could have turned it around.
Jim Rice and Dwight Evans didn't go out on their own terms.Rasputin said:
His terms.
threecy said:Jim Rice and Dwight Evans didn't go out on their own terms.
BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
And your point is? David Ortiz, in the RedSox pantheon is arguably one of three or four most important players to have ever played for them (Williams, Yaz, Speaker ? ). I'm not arguing that Ortiz has been a better player than Evans or Rice but he certainly has been more important. When you play a lead role in bringing three Championships in 10 years to a franchise like the RedSox - and all it's tortured history - you deserve to go out on your own terms.
And I thought they screwed over Evans and Rice as well. Which is why it would be really, really nice if just for once they do the right thing.
Jim Rice's OPS+ for his last four seasons: 137, 101, 101, 70. How exactly did they screw him over?BCsMightyJoeYoung said:And I thought they screwed over Evans and Rice as well. Which is why it would be really, really nice if just for once they do the right thing.
There is no doubt in my mind that whether Ortiz is benched, released, is traded, retired etc. it will be a few week blip of fans and media losing their mind about how he should have been treated.BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
And your point is? David Ortiz, in the RedSox pantheon is arguably one of three or four most important players to have ever played for them (Williams, Yaz, Speaker ? ). I'm not arguing that Ortiz has been a better player than Evans or Rice but he certainly has been more important. When you play a lead role in bringing three Championships in 10 years to a franchise like the RedSox - and all it's tortured history - you deserve to go out on your own terms.
And I thought they screwed over Evans and Rice as well. Which is why it would be really, really nice if just for once they do the right thing.
Why can't they buy out his 2017 option behind closed doors if he's hitting that poorly? All people are here are suggesting is that Ortiz has earned the right to have anything like that happen behind closed doors, instead of publicly. David is a big boy, I think if they're honest and respect him when they talk about him retiring, he'd understand why they want to give him the money and have him retire instead of having a big ugly situation in 2017. If it doesn't play out like that, fine but disrespecting publicly (including benching him to avoid the 2017) is a mistake for a guy who's meant so much to franchise over the last decade.moondog80 said:
His terms no matter what? What if next year he completely falls apart, against righties too, should they keep playing him until he reaches his option for 2017? Because if they bench him in that situation, he's going to be upset. Ortiz has been awesome and will always be a legend in town, and yes, he's bought himself a little bit of deference at the margins, but for the most part their obligation to respect Ortiz (a guy they've paid $143 million) is trumped by their obligation to win games.
You're missing the overall point. It will be a blip. He will be royalty in his post playing career.MakMan44 said:Grim is nuts. If Papi is treated poorly aka, benched, released or traded, I can't imagine it NOT being a big story for the entire season.
MakMan44 said:Why can't they buy out his 2017 option behind closed doors if he's hitting that poorly? All people are here are suggesting is that Ortiz has earned the right to have anything like that happen behind closed doors, instead of publicly. David is a big boy, I think if they're honest and respect him when they talk about him retiring, he'd understand why they want to give him the money and have him retire instead of having a big ugly situation in 2017. If it doesn't play out like that, fine but disrespecting publicly (including benching him to avoid the 2017) is a mistake for a guy who's meant so much to franchise over the last decade.
Grim is nuts. If Papi is treated poorly aka, benched, released or traded, I can't imagine it NOT being a big story for the entire season.
The fact that Ortiz ranks in the top 20 in Major League Baseball in exit velocity is intriguing, given that the other members of the group represent something of a who’s-who of the game’s top sluggers, with names like Giancarlo Stanton, Miguel Cabrera, and Josh Donaldson near the top of the list. Meanwhile, lining up Ortiz’s statistics next to the other members of the MLB top 20 in exit velocity is something of an exercise in “one of these things is not like the other.”
Pedro hasn't forgotten about it, it was an entire chapter in his book. I did miss the overall point though, and I agree that it won't stop Ortiz from remaining attached the Sox for the rest of his days.grimshaw said:You're missing the overall point. It will be a blip. He will be royalty in his post playing career.
No one cares about how things ended with Pedro and Rice anymore. Pretty sure those guys have gotten over it.
You can never completely take the diva out of the diva as much as we all love that guy.MakMan44 said:Pedro hasn't forgotten about it, it was an entire chapter in his book. I did miss the overall point though, and I agree that it won't stop Ortiz from remaining attached the Sox for the rest of his days.
Schnerres said:Is there a chance that David Ortiz walks away after this season? How big is it?
Edit: if he is non-injured.
Schnerres said:Is there a chance that David Ortiz walks away after this season? How big is it?
Edit: if he is non-injured.
For Ortiz in 2014, pitches thrown after 30 seconds gained .0289 runs, whereas pitches under 30 seconds were worth only .0014 runs. The difference a few seconds makes to Ortiz is about three times the value for the average batter. This isn’t a fluke just for 2014: Four of the past five years have seen Ortiz reap great benefits from delaying the time between pitches by 30 seconds or more.
Now that IS interesting. I know he was complaining about the new step our restrictions before the season started. Perhaps he was intuitively aware of this effect.Laser Show said:This is interesting: http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/big-papi-needs-more-time-to-think/
When Victorino is back? What would give us any assurance that Victorino and his hammie's would be active for more than two or so weeks before heading back to the DL? Its time to move on with multiple personalities on this current team.Buzzkill Pauley said:The problem, of course, is that the Sox can't platoon both Sandoval and Ortiz until Victorino returns, while at the same time keeping Brock Holt in the lineup every day.
When Shane's back then Ortiz and Sandoval can hit against RHSP, with Napoli and Victorino getting the call against LHSP.
And both platoons together only cost the Sox $62M! WIN-WIN!
threecy said:Oritz OPS by Month
.782 - Mar/Apr
.624 - May
.522.796- June
GeorgeCostanza said:Papi giving the ump the heave ho. I haven't seen that one before.
Forgive me for replying to a comment from I don't even know how long ago, but the fact that Rice and Evans and everybody else didn't go out on their terms is why I want Papi to do it.threecy said:Jim Rice and Dwight Evans didn't go out on their own terms.
Rasputin said:Forgive me for replying to a comment from I don't even know how long ago, but the fact that Rice and Evans and everybody else didn't go out on their terms is why I want Papi to do it.
I mean, fuck, Pedro Martinez didn't get to go out on his terms.
I want to see one of the people who has brought me so much joy over the last decade plus have a seamless transition to retirement without all the bullshit.
Rice and Evans were toast when the Red Sox let them go, and at least in the case of the latter, he later admitted he should have called it a career when that day came.Rasputin said:Forgive me for replying to a comment from I don't even know how long ago, but the fact that Rice and Evans and everybody else didn't go out on their terms is why I want Papi to do it.