I hope they surprise me. Clearly that would appear to be the case but I personally am not expecting much of a return for him, if at all. I think this could be one of those scenarios where we misjudged the market, although I hope I am wrong and they (KW / Hahn) clearly know the market better than I do.

But even if it is an A ball pitcher with an 8.00 ERA who throws 100, it's a better chance than zero.

If the Sox don't want him on the roster, they could waive him during Spring Training and be on the hook for 20% of his salary. So they really aren't even risking $1 million.

 

And there is always a chance they wouldn't mind keeping him. Steverson was quoted a month or so ago raving about how hard he works, and how much he wants to be good. He is still pretty young.

 

real nice info there. thanks for sharing.

 

it really makes sense now.

But even if it is an A ball pitcher with an 8.00 ERA who throws 100, it's a better chance than zero.

 

If that's all they can get, the Sox will just keep him around as an insurance policy for Avi and/or the LF we hopefully acquire. In reality, you can do much worse than Viciedo when you're onto your 4th, 5th, 6th options in the OF. Somewhat of a spendy insurance policy, but let's be real, $4M isn't breaking the bank.

 

The Sox aren't going to just let some team have Viciedo.

To me, Viciedo is the type of guy that Hahn/KW pick up for nothing right at this point in the players career.

Yeah...we'll see what they get. If they get something of extremely minimal value, then i'd say it wasn't worth the risk of being stuck paying him 4+M.

 

it is not over yet.. but what a gamble.

If the Sox don't want him on the roster, they could waive him during Spring Training and be on the hook for 20% of his salary. So they really aren't even risking $1 million.

 

And there is always a chance they wouldn't mind keeping him. Steverson was quoted a month or so ago raving about how hard he works, and how much he wants to be good. He is still pretty young.

My issue with keeping him is I think our defense is absolutely pathetic and we can't consciously build our team around pitching and not focus on defense. I see no way that Viciedo turns into a positive defender, which means he has to really really really hit to provide significant value. I actually think he could do that, but feel he's just a really bad fit on our current roster.

i am old fart and do not know the advance stats and all. i am old school. #1 get on base,

#2, move him over, let #1 cause havoc on the base path, lead off, steal a base. #3,4,5

let them hit away.

 

btw imo the best hitter is always been #3.

Thank you an I agree. I do remember when they put Fisk in the 2 spot an he had one of his best yrs. ever hitting there.

My issue with keeping him is I think our defense is absolutely pathetic and we can't consciously build our team around pitching and not focus on defense. I see no way that Viciedo turns into a positive defender, which means he has to really really really hit to provide significant value. I actually think he could do that, but feel he's just a really bad fit on our current roster.

 

I agree, we gave our opponents way too many outs last year. We will never improve much if that continues.

Thank you an I agree. I do remember when they put Fisk in the 2 spot an he had one of his best yrs. ever hitting there.

 

i remember a game in Minny with the old park, which was new at the time.

they the twins were making fun or something against the sox. the sox #2

hitter was up, he had like 10 check swings where the ball went into the

twins dugout. that let to the twins hitting him to get him on base.

 

the next time up, he did that same thing, and the same thing with the

twins hitting him.

 

he was extremely funny, he was the a hitter who had great control of

his bat.

My issue with keeping him is I think our defense is absolutely pathetic and we can't consciously build our team around pitching and not focus on defense. I see no way that Viciedo turns into a positive defender, which means he has to really really really hit to provide significant value. I actually think he could do that, but feel he's just a really bad fit on our current roster.

 

my issue is with DV, he has some promise, then it was like the next

2 yrs he stopped listening to the coaches.

I don't doubt that Ackley would be maximizing the return from Viciedo. I am stating that I don't think any return that the Sox might get for Viciedo should be viewed as a starting position player for 2015. I think the Sox need to find a better LF than one that can be gotten for Viciedo.

 

I'd rather go for one or two minor league arms that are most likely to never pan out but have at least a small potential to turn into a good reliever or 4/5 starter.

 

Good point, and I agree. Especially if 3B is not going to be a power position for the Sox, they really should have a run producer in LF, or at the very least, someone with good speed, defense

and the ability to get on base.

Edited December 10, 201411 yr by Lillian

Good point, and I agree. Thanks

 

i will like to add, if Sea doesn't want to go that route, then the

sox have nothing.

Look at Mark Reynolds, 2012. 2013 the Indians gave him $6 million. He can't field either.

i will like to add, if Sea doesn't want to go that route, then the

sox have nothing.

 

There are only so many roster spots. If the player they acquire cannot be a productive addition to that roster, I'd rather have some minor league prospects.

I just don't see Ackley as a guy who helps this team improve the roster.

There are only so many roster spots. If the player they acquire cannot be a productive addition to that roster, I'd rather have some minor league prospects.

I just don't see Ackley as a guy who helps this team improve the roster.

 

He provides depth. He can play several positions on the field and he won't kill you at the plate nor in the field. Those glue guys can add a lot to a team.

There are only so many roster spots. If the player they acquire cannot be a productive addition to that roster, I'd rather have some minor league prospects.

I just don't see Ackley as a guy who helps this team improve the roster.

 

i will admit that i am sooo blinded in seeing DV gone, that sometimes

i can't see straight. but Ackley is a last resort kind of player for the

sox to get if it mean DV being gone.

 

minor leaguers, the sox don't have any that can fill that bill better

than DV.

I think DV value on the trade market is minimal at best.

i will admit that i am sooo blinded in seeing DV gone, that sometimes

i can't see straight. but Ackley is a last resort kind of player for the

sox to get if it mean DV being gone.

 

minor leaguers, the sox don't have any that can fill that bill better

than DV.

 

Perhaps I didn't articulate my thought clearly. What I meant was that this team needs to fill the hole in LF with someone better than Ackley. I agree that

Viciedo is not acceptable either. If they move Viciedo, they don't have to move him for a left fielder, as someone else just pointed out. However, if the guy that they acquire

is not a significant upgrade in left, then I'd just as soon that they trade him, and his $4 million salary for low cost, prospects for the future.

 

They then have a roster spot open for that needed left fielder, and a little extra money to spend on him.

 

Perhaps I didn't articulate my thought clearly. What I meant was that this team needs to fill the hole in LF with someone better than Ackley. I agree that

Viciedo is not acceptable either. If they move Viciedo, they don't have to move him for a left fielder, as someone else just pointed out. However, if the guy that they acquire

is not a significant upgrade in left, then I'd just as soon that they trade him, and his $4 million salary for low cost, prospects for the future.

 

They then have a roster spot open for that needed left fielder, and a little extra money to spend on him.

 

that is my point. only Sea wants to play, if Sea says no to the

prospects, DV will not get traded. unless if its for Ackley.

 

Perhaps I didn't articulate my thought clearly. What I meant was that this team needs to fill the hole in LF with someone better than Ackley. I agree that

Viciedo is not acceptable either. If they move Viciedo, they don't have to move him for a left fielder, as someone else just pointed out. However, if the guy that they acquire

is not a significant upgrade in left, then I'd just as soon that they trade him, and his $4 million salary for low cost, prospects for the future.

 

They then have a roster spot open for that needed left fielder, and a little extra money to spend on him.

 

What kind of prospects do you expect to get for Dayan?

@MaineSkin Viciedo was 2nd to only Stanton in oppo fld HRs '14. BABIP .030 blw avg, if he gets FBs up, it's 30+ anywhere

He provides depth. He can play several positions on the field and he won't kill you at the plate nor in the field. Those glue guys can add a lot to a team.

 

If he's the super utility guy that Marcus might have been, I have no problems with Ackley. Not as a starter, though. Doubt he'd like that.

Edited December 10, 201411 yr by Stan Bahnsen

If he's the super utility guy that Marcus might have been, I have no problems with Ackley. Not as a starter, though. Doubt he'd like that.

 

maybe it is me and my stubbornness, but i still see him as a

starter. granted lets see how he does.

maybe it is me and my stubbornness, but i still see him as a

starter. granted lets see how he does.

 

That's just it, I don't want to "see how he does". I think I know who he is. If he's plan A as the LF starter, aim higher.

@MaineSkin Viciedo was 2nd to only Stanton in oppo fld HRs '14. BABIP .030 blw avg, if he gets FBs up, it's 30+ anywhere

 

Lol, yeah, let's go with that. Line up, teams!