greg775 Posted June 28, 2011 Share Posted June 28, 2011 Well after reading this, it's obvious the Sox are doing the stall thing with Viciedo because of service time. Of course that has to be the reason. Hope it doesn't cost us the division. Cause this lineup remains kind of inept. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maggsmaggs Posted June 28, 2011 Share Posted June 28, 2011 (edited) QUOTE (greg775 @ Jun 27, 2011 -> 10:58 PM) Well after reading this, it's obvious the Sox are doing the stall thing with Viciedo because of service time. Of course that has to be the reason. Hope it doesn't cost us the division. Cause this lineup remains kind of inept. FIXED. Edited June 28, 2011 by maggsmaggs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
koz Posted June 28, 2011 Share Posted June 28, 2011 QUOTE (maggsmaggs @ Jun 27, 2011 -> 11:08 PM) FIXED. I believe the best possible solution to the Adam Dunn/Viciedo problem is simply switching them..Adam right now is a head case and needs to get away from the scrutiny and find himself again in AAA..This allows Viciedo to come up and hopefully continue to rake..TCQ could become DH and the Tank plays RF...Problem solved Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sayitaintso Posted June 28, 2011 Share Posted June 28, 2011 QUOTE (koz @ Jun 27, 2011 -> 11:46 PM) I believe the best possible solution to the Adam Dunn/Viciedo problem is simply switching them..Adam right now is a head case and needs to get away from the scrutiny and find himself again in AAA..This allows Viciedo to come up and hopefully continue to rake..TCQ could become DH and the Tank plays RF...Problem solvedDunn will not be sent down. A rehab stint maybe, but he wont get sent down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted June 28, 2011 Share Posted June 28, 2011 QUOTE (greg775 @ Jun 27, 2011 -> 10:58 PM) Well after reading this, it's obvious the Sox are doing the stall thing with Viciedo because of service time. Of course that has to be the reason. Hope it doesn't cost us the division. Cause this lineup remains kind of inept. We must have the worst reporters in the country. Why hasn't anyone cornered Kenny and asked him why a sizzling hot guy in Charlotte is still there? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
103 mph screwball Posted June 28, 2011 Share Posted June 28, 2011 I understand the argument to replace Pierre with Tank, but right now I would replace Dunn with Tank. Let Dunn have a minor nagging "injury" and let him work things out. Let Dunn play a rehab stint in the minors to get things going again. When Dunn comes back crushing the ball, then Tank can go to left field if he is hitting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lillian Posted June 28, 2011 Share Posted June 28, 2011 If service time is indeed the reason that Viciedo has not been brought up, why couldn't they have made the move earlier, and simply planned to send him back down later in the season, if the team didn't have a realistic shot at post season play? If the Sox were in contention, and Viciedo had been contributing significantly, that would have justified the cost of one year of service time. If not, they could have still avoided the adverse service time consequence by simply returning him to Charlotte. I understand that they would have had to use one of his options, but that shouldn't be an issue with Viciedo. Once he comes to the Big Leagues, he shouldn't need to be sent back down very often. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted June 28, 2011 Share Posted June 28, 2011 QUOTE (Wanne @ Jun 27, 2011 -> 11:13 PM) What's ironic I find is there's the entire thread about "return on investment" in terms of Pierre. Dayan doesn't make chicken feed.... Good lord this is maddening!!!!! Keeping Viciedo in the minors longer is likely to save the Sox money in arbitration though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted June 28, 2011 Share Posted June 28, 2011 But how much is it costing them in gate revenues and season tickets sold for next year if this team doesn't finish 1st? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted June 28, 2011 Share Posted June 28, 2011 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jun 28, 2011 -> 09:27 AM) But how much is it costing them in gate revenues and season tickets sold for next year if this team doesn't finish 1st? That's the thing that teams never seem to think about. A few years ago the Brewers did the same trick with a kid named Ryan Braun, held him out through the Super 2 deadline, first game was on May 25. Kid comes up and puts up an OPS over 1.000. The Brewers lost the NL Central that year by 2 games. Now of course, you can add all the caveats you want and there's no guarantee you'd have won 3 more games if you had Braun for another 7 weeks...but that's a very close run thing to buy yourself another year before FA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 28, 2011 Share Posted June 28, 2011 QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jun 27, 2011 -> 09:46 PM) I know, it makes too much sense for them to do it. Today would have been the perfect day to bring him up too. Well to be fair, they wouldn't have done it on the off day, they would do it today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted June 28, 2011 Share Posted June 28, 2011 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jun 28, 2011 -> 08:27 AM) But how much is it costing them in gate revenues and season tickets sold for next year if this team doesn't finish 1st? Excellent point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 28, 2011 Share Posted June 28, 2011 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jun 28, 2011 -> 08:27 AM) But how much is it costing them in gate revenues and season tickets sold for next year if this team doesn't finish 1st? It could just as easily be spun around the other way... Maybe if people were showing up, they could buy out Pierre. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted June 28, 2011 Share Posted June 28, 2011 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 28, 2011 -> 07:29 AM) That's the thing that teams never seem to think about. A few years ago the Brewers did the same trick with a kid named Ryan Braun, held him out through the Super 2 deadline, first game was on May 25. Kid comes up and puts up an OPS over 1.000. The Brewers lost the NL Central that year by 2 games. Now of course, you can add all the caveats you want and there's no guarantee you'd have won 3 more games if you had Braun for another 7 weeks...but that's a very close run thing to buy yourself another year before FA. Will have Juan Pierre induced nightmares if Viciedo puts up similar numbers. However, that shouldn't be the main cause being "JUST" five games down at this point. But we DIRELY need Viciedo's bat for those remaining games against Minnesota (14), Detroit (12) and Cleveland (13 I think). Ozzie can play him all he wants against COL and the Cubs, but that's where the line has to be drawn. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted June 28, 2011 Share Posted June 28, 2011 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 28, 2011 -> 09:44 AM) It could just as easily be spun around the other way... Maybe if people were showing up, they could buy out Pierre. That'd make no sense though...whether 3,000 people show up or 30,000 people show up, they're paying Pierre the same amount. The finance change right now by cutting Pierre and calling up Viciedo is what, $250k? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted June 28, 2011 Share Posted June 28, 2011 More KW quotes: On the growing furor over Viciedo tearing up the International League while Juan Pierre struggles and is staunchly defended by Guillen: "(Viciedo) is playing his (butt) off offensively and defensively. But I'm not going to put a player on this team that my manager is not ready for. I respect him too much to do that. "When you say somebody is ready, that just means they're ready. That doesn't mean they can't get better. He's a young guy. He's not a finished product. He's getting better and better. There is no immediate rush to have him in there. We have faith in all (the current) guys." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigruss Posted June 28, 2011 Share Posted June 28, 2011 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 28, 2011 -> 09:00 AM) That'd make no sense though...whether 3,000 people show up or 30,000 people show up, they're paying Pierre the same amount. The finance change right now by cutting Pierre and calling up Viciedo is what, $250k? I think his point was that if the Sox had more money from attendance, they would be more willing to take the hit of cutting Pierre and having to buy him out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted June 28, 2011 Share Posted June 28, 2011 QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Jun 28, 2011 -> 10:03 AM) I think his point was that if the Sox had more money from attendance, they would be more willing to take the hit of cutting Pierre and having to buy him out. Again, that makes no sense since the contract is guaranteed. If the Sox have 15 people through the gate the rest of the year, they still owe Juan Pierre another $3 million+ (with some from the Dodgers now up in the air added on). The only thing that changes if you cut Juan Pierre is that you might have to pay some portion of it 2 months earlier, and if the Sox are that stressed for $2 million, then they're going to be doing what the McCourts just did in about 8 weeks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted June 28, 2011 Share Posted June 28, 2011 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 28, 2011 -> 09:05 AM) Again, that makes no sense since the contract is guaranteed. If the Sox have 15 people through the gate the rest of the year, they still owe Juan Pierre another $3 million+ (with some from the Dodgers now up in the air added on). The only thing that changes if you cut Juan Pierre is that you might have to pay some portion of it 2 months earlier, and if the Sox are that stressed for $2 million, then they're going to be doing what the McCourts just did in about 8 weeks. Bingo. It doesn't get more clear cut than that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted June 28, 2011 Share Posted June 28, 2011 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jun 28, 2011 -> 08:45 AM) Will have Juan Pierre induced nightmares if Viciedo puts up similar numbers. However, that shouldn't be the main cause being "JUST" five games down at this point. But we DIRELY need Viciedo's bat for those remaining games against Minnesota (14), Detroit (12) and Cleveland (13 I think). Ozzie can play him all he wants against COL and the Cubs, but that's where the line has to be drawn. After the weekend @ Wrigley, here's how the schedule plays out: 3 vs. KC, 4 vs. MIN, 3 @ DET, 3 @ KC, 3 @ CLE, 3 vs. DET, 3 vs. BOS, 4 vs. NYY, 3 @ MIN BOS & NYY are obviously not division rivals, but some offense could be used vs. those lineups as well Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 28, 2011 Share Posted June 28, 2011 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 28, 2011 -> 09:00 AM) That'd make no sense though...whether 3,000 people show up or 30,000 people show up, they're paying Pierre the same amount. The finance change right now by cutting Pierre and calling up Viciedo is what, $250k? It is the difference between paying him now and paying him over the course of a season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted June 28, 2011 Share Posted June 28, 2011 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 28, 2011 -> 09:06 AM) It is the difference between paying him now and paying him over the course of a season. Sorry but that's a trivial amount in the grand scheme of things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted June 28, 2011 Share Posted June 28, 2011 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 28, 2011 -> 10:06 AM) It is the difference between paying him now and paying him over the course of a season. For Adam Dunn I'd agree that's a problem. For Juan Pierre, if the Sox are that close to missing payroll that they're willing to put a worse team on the field...then like I just said, we're McCourting it come August. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 28, 2011 Share Posted June 28, 2011 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 28, 2011 -> 09:05 AM) Again, that makes no sense since the contract is guaranteed. If the Sox have 15 people through the gate the rest of the year, they still owe Juan Pierre another $3 million+ (with some from the Dodgers now up in the air added on). The only thing that changes if you cut Juan Pierre is that you might have to pay some portion of it 2 months earlier, and if the Sox are that stressed for $2 million, then they're going to be doing what the McCourts just did in about 8 weeks. Well because of the McCourts it isn't just $2 million anymore, it is now $5.5 million. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maggsmaggs Posted June 28, 2011 Share Posted June 28, 2011 QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jun 28, 2011 -> 09:03 AM) More KW quotes: "(Viciedo) is playing his (butt) off offensively and defensively. But I'm not going to put a player on this team that my manager is not ready for. I respect him too much to do that. I don't even know what that means. My manager is not ready for? That is so nebulous. Just keep throwing Ozzie under the bus KW. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.