iamshack

QUOTE (fathom @ Apr 25, 2012 -> 04:19 PM) Ventura's managed two very bad games the last two days. ?

Alex!

Alex!

QUOTE (fathom @ Apr 25, 2012 -> 01:21 PM) Thing is, even if he plays well and we don't win and he doesn't get traded, it's a heck of a lot better to have someone the next few years who's just not an absolute non-factor on the roster. I see a lot of people asking for him to get traded ASAP, and as much as that could help the franchise, it's just not likely to happen with the amount of money he has left on his deal. I agree on all counts.

QUOTE (fathom @ Apr 25, 2012 -> 02:11 PM) I don't like Rios either, but he's been a huge catalyst for this offense and basically won us at least two games so far this year (Texas/Sunday in Seattle). Greg's been making some very definitive statements the last few days about Rios and the Sox. He's one of those guys that makes everything look so fluid and easy that it appears as though he is not trying. He has tons of talent and that makes him a lightning rod for criticism when he doesn't play well. I understand that. But it is in everyone's best interests for him to play well..either because it improves our chances of winning games or because it improves our chances of shipping him out. I see him as a guy who can really be a key to both our offense and defense, and so I choose to cheer him on...but I can understand those who don't trust him and just want him gone. Having him fail, however, won't help anyone.

QUOTE (fathom @ Apr 25, 2012 -> 02:09 PM) Ironic because he used to praise Ozzie for handling the players and their psyche so well. Now that Ozzie's gone, I guess that doesn't matter. Greg has had it out for Rios since the day we acquired him.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Apr 25, 2012 -> 12:58 PM) 1.) Who cares? He f***ed with fans' psyches enough himself that I don't care if his psyche gets f***ed with. Kudos to Robin for single-handedly ending his chance at a 12-game hit streak. I can't believe a guy has a decent April on here and all the Rios love. Let's see his numbers/boneheaded plays as the season progresses. What the heck is wrong with you?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 25, 2012 -> 01:21 PM) So move him to LF? Or Ethier, yes.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 25, 2012 -> 12:17 PM) Are you benching Either or Kemp? Yeah, we're going to bench Kemp. No, you're replacing Rivera most likely. Obviously you'd want to move him in the offseason...when more teams have flexibility.

QUOTE (SoxFan1 @ Apr 25, 2012 -> 01:13 PM) I'm convinced 100% that it's Manto, because I know for a fact that Greg Walker visited him and reworked his swing in the offseason (in one day, mind you) before 2010 and he had a hot start then too. It's just getting him to be willing to take pitches out over the plate to the opposite field...

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 25, 2012 -> 12:03 PM) So who has a space for Rios and have the ability to pay him? LA Dodgers

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 25, 2012 -> 11:54 AM) Rios would have to have a career year to be truly tradeable, without hooking the Sox for a ton of cash, or for including our own top guys to balance it out. No major league general manager is going forget about the previous body of work for Alex Rios. I disagree...just look at Vernon Wells...

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Apr 25, 2012 -> 12:47 PM) I'm not arguing, and won't take your bait, just pointing out that Michael Bowden isn't such a great prospect that Cubs decided to eat $6 million to obtain his services. They were going to have to eat the money if they wanted to rid themselves of Byrd. As I mentioned, I think Bowden is a little better than what you would normally get for Byrd, but the Red Sox were going to lose him for nothing anyway, and he's still a longshot to be much in the major leagues. Ok, well that's just fine...and not really disputing anything I pointed out...

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Apr 25, 2012 -> 12:36 PM) No the main reason is getting him off the roster lets the younger guys play and they get a flier on Bowden. If the Red Sox offered the Cubs $1 million in savings and prospect no better than me or you instead, The Cubs would have taken that. The Cubs weren't going to be able to trade Byrd without eating his contract. Teams that budget $6 million to spend during the season don't keep it handy for Marlon Byrd. Bowden couldn't hang in the Boston bullpen and they were just about to waive him anyway. Now when Ellsbury comes back, the Red Sox can waive Byrd if he still can't hit, without hurting themselves financially as I think they have luxury tax issues. Ricketts is paying a few teams to take old Cubs and probably isn't done wiring money to other teams. So what point are you trying to make, other than just wanting to argue with me?

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Apr 25, 2012 -> 10:31 AM) Its not like Bowden was a prized prospect anymore. He was designated for assignment. He's a better bet than most of the crap you would get for Byrd, but certainly not the main reason the Cubs are eating as much of the contract they are allowed . So is the main reason Theo helping out Cherington?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 25, 2012 -> 07:48 AM) Unfortunately in this case, the Red Sox couldn't be that team, because Rios's salary would easily push them into Luxury Tax territory. Well that was the whole point I made...which is the entire reason they had to give up Bowden.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 25, 2012 -> 08:22 AM) I noticed that. So in a desperation mode, in April, they were still able to get the other team to essentially pay the entire contract. The White Sox would be on the other side of this ledger. Yeah, but they compensated by trading an actual prospect instead of a bag of balls... Now the Rios situation is much different because he is owed far more money, but if they didn't want to pay for Rios' salary, they could certainly include some cost-controlled prospects or young players instead of eating salary. For instance, there might be a team would be willing to take Rios and most of his salary if you included Addison Reed and Nestor Molina and Viciedo with him... It's just paying with different assets...

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 25, 2012 -> 08:08 AM) They still managed to get the Cubs to pick up the entire value of the contract, minus the pro-rated minimum salary. Notice the part about where I said the Red Sox had no choice but to do so?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 25, 2012 -> 08:03 AM) NO one is going to trade for Rios in April unless we picked up the entire deal. See also, Byrd, Marlon. I think that was a result of the Red Sox having no choice and having to actually give up someone you've heard of for him as a result. That was a necessity for the Red Sox, not necessarily the market value of Byrd...

QUOTE (fathom @ Apr 24, 2012 -> 09:59 PM) Still can't believe Nats traded this guy. In two years, he'll be better than Gio in my opinion. I don't know about that but he's already awfully good and they gave them Peacock as well as AJ Cole...

QUOTE (fathom @ Apr 24, 2012 -> 08:32 PM) Hawk went nuts on Alexei's, and he totally no sold Viciedo's I think he went to school on Alexei's a bit... Grrr

QUOTE (fathom @ Apr 24, 2012 -> 08:17 PM) You don't see Konerko miss a pitch by that much usually. And everyone else did exactly what Stone said you don't want to do against him...

Ugh...Gavin better show up tonight...

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Apr 24, 2012 -> 08:54 PM) It's the players who failed, not Ozzie. Thanks, Greg. Haha...I hate to side with Ozzie, but that is a bit ridiculous...

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 24, 2012 -> 07:50 PM) Lefty right matchups on all of them? I believe so...