SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Will the Red Sox trade Hanley or Pablo?
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,700
|
Post by nomar on Oct 8, 2015 8:18:24 GMT -5
On the Sandoval platoon note: it probably would be smart to platoon him just so he gets days off. Obviously he's not in great shape so it would probably keep him fresher.
|
|
|
Post by SlugLife on Oct 8, 2015 9:02:44 GMT -5
Addition by subtraction. Both have to go, one way or another. If they can get someone decent in return, great. If not, release them. Money is no object to Henry, so that shouldn't matter. Forget the money. Look for the talent. I'm guessing that Dave Dombrowski did not say that in his job interview.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Oct 8, 2015 10:00:33 GMT -5
hint: Chaz talks about his defense in this link. It's better than you might think. That's pretty crazy. Why did he ever move to 1B? Makes me want to dump Pablo even more. Shaw could be a decent 3B.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,700
|
Post by nomar on Oct 8, 2015 10:24:24 GMT -5
hint: Chaz talks about his defense in this link. It's better than you might think. That's pretty crazy. Why did he ever move to 1B? Makes me want to dump Pablo even more. Shaw could be a decent 3B. I think at one point to let Cecchini play 3B.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Oct 8, 2015 18:12:47 GMT -5
That's pretty crazy. Why did he ever move to 1B? ... Flexibility no doubt. He's a good not a great hitter, and he's a decent fielder, again not all star quality. Playing multiple positions gave him more options. Having watched them both I think that Sandoval is better at third base. Right now however there's no question that Shaw has a lot more value with the bat. It's hard to know where the Sox can bat Sandoval, he's such a wild swinger.
|
|
|
Post by Smittyw on Oct 8, 2015 19:16:19 GMT -5
That's pretty crazy. Why did he ever move to 1B? Makes me want to dump Pablo even more. Shaw could be a decent 3B. I think at one point to let Cecchini play 3B. Your dose of irony for tonight...
|
|
|
Post by mredsox89 on Oct 8, 2015 19:20:53 GMT -5
I'm just not sure there is really an option for easy replacement, unless you're purely going on the addition by subtraction method with slight $ savings. I mean sure, if a team only needs the Sox to subsidize 30-40% of the deal, maybe it's worth it and then you figure out how to fill the hole. But if it costs you nearly what it did the Angels to get rid of Hamilton, with no one truly knocking down the door at either corner position right now, what exactly do you accomplish?
As well as Shaw played, I certainly wouldn't be fully comfortable with him as a starting corner infielder going into next season. If one of the Greenville gang were banging down the door, then dumping at whatever cost could make sense. But they're still years away, and you will almost always be able to find someone who will take a player if you cover nearly the player's entire cost. So if that situation arises a year from now, two years from now, that option still remains.
|
|
|
Post by jdb on Oct 8, 2015 22:31:38 GMT -5
I just think Hanley has to go. I've seen the Indians posted as a possible match and think it should be mentioned they just traded for Chris Johnson and his $16.5 million with their bad contracts going the other way. He's not a great but he hits LHP okay and could back up the corner infield spots and possibly platoon with Shaw. Maybe pay down Hanley at $5 million a year or so going to Cleveland.
|
|
|
Post by mandelbro on Oct 9, 2015 9:52:18 GMT -5
In my opinion Brian is Boston's number four starter right now. I'd trade Owens to a big ball park team like San Diego. I'd package him with JBJ or Castillo. Owens is a fly ball pitcher which has never worked well long term in Fenway. I wonder what Washington would take for one of their pitchers? By July 31 I see a totally different team, Sam Travis at first, Shaw at third, Xavier at short, Dustin at second, JBJ in right (assuming he's not traded) Castillo (assuming he's not traded) and Mookie in center. I have mixed feelings about Catcher as I am really high on both. Obviously Henley and Panda are a forgotten memory wRC+ this past season:David Ortiz: 138 Jackie Bradley: 121 (in 255 PA, buoyed by an ISO of .249) Mookie Betts: 119 Travis Shaw: 119 (in 248 PA, after being a AAAA guy until a few months ago, may not even be able to handle 3rd) Dustin Pedroia: 116 Xander Bogaerts: 109 Blake Swihart: 91 Rusney Castillo: 72 Sam Travis: in AA What could possibly go wrong with this plan? People love to point out how young the team is. But that works both ways. The best hitter on the team is going to be 40 next year. One fo the anticipated top offensive performers in Pedroia is no spring chicken himself, and has struggled to stay on the field. I get that we hate him and I get that he's an idiot but idiot Hanley played hurt for most of the year. He has a track record of being an excellent offensive player. Yet we want to pay $15M today, for the privilege of making him go away, for the privilege to play a AA kid at 1st and play a 1st baseman who might not be able to reprise his offensive production... at third? I don't understand this whole "wish away Ramirez and Sandoval" thing. They're here. They're getting paid. And they have track records. Yet we want to cut off our nose to spite our face and throw some kids into the fire instead.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Oct 9, 2015 10:36:17 GMT -5
Where does the belief that Shaw cannot play 3B very well come from? I listened to nearly every game this year and when he was at third the announcers, who I think are pretty good, both said he played 3B very well. A number of times he was said to have made exceptional plays.
He has good hands, a good arm, and good instincts. What he may lack is range but some of that can be made up for with positioning.
I'm not saying he should be the 3B. I like him better at 1B. But I think he is viable defensively as the backup for 3B and occasional starter there. And, of course, he hit better than Sandoval. Whether he will do that next year is anyone's guess, but my guess is that he will.
I doubt Sam Travis will be ready next year, except maybe for a late season call-up. Just as it is a big jump from A+ to AA, it is at least as big a jump from AA to AAA. Travis made the first jump quite well. The next one will be a better test.
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Oct 9, 2015 10:47:37 GMT -5
Where does the belief that Shaw cannot play 3B very well come from? I listened to nearly every game this year and when he was at third the announcers, who I think are pretty good, both said he played 3B very well. A number of times he was said to have made exceptional plays. He has good hands, a good arm, and good instincts. What he may lack is range but some of that can be made up for with positioning. I'm not saying he should be the 3B. I like him better at 1B. But I think he is viable defensively as the backup for 3B and occasional starter there. And, of course, he hit better than Sandoval. Whether he will do that next year is anyone's guess, but my guess is that he will. I doubt Sam Travis will be ready next year, except maybe for a late season call-up. Just as it is a big jump from A+ to AA, it is at least as big a jump from AA to AAA. Travis made the first jump quite well. The next one will be a better test. I think Shaw's arm is adequate only. I never saw real zip to first. Occasional starter at 3B...yup. He came in on some balls nicely and showed he could be OK there.....But he is not a quick-twitch guy IMO. Still moving b/t first and third..that's nice to have. I think Sam Travis is prime bait for trade....particularly as his power numbers remain low and we have something of a dearth there especially when Papi goes. If we are going to trade prospects without gutting the farm I would think that he, Margot, Guerra, Kopech, Johnson (Owens) and Marrero are the most likely to pack bags.
|
|
radiohix
Veteran
'At the end of the day, we bang. We bang. We're going to swing.' Alex Verdugo
Posts: 6,195
Member is Online
|
Post by radiohix on Oct 9, 2015 10:54:05 GMT -5
|
|
gerry
Veteran
Enter your message here...
Posts: 1,656
|
Post by gerry on Oct 9, 2015 10:59:10 GMT -5
Where does the belief that Shaw cannot play 3B very well come from? I listened to nearly every game this year and when he was at third the announcers, who I think are pretty good, both said he played 3B very well. A number of times he was said to have made exceptional plays. He has good hands, a good arm, and good instincts. What he may lack is range but some of that can be made up for with positioning. I'm not saying he should be the 3B. I like him better at 1B. But I think he is viable defensively as the backup for 3B and occasional starter there. And, of course, he hit better than Sandoval. Whether he will do that next year is anyone's guess, but my guess is that he will. I doubt Sam Travis will be ready next year, except maybe for a late season call-up. Just as it is a big jump from A+ to AA, it is at least as big a jump from AA to AAA. Travis made the first jump quite well. The next one will be a better test. Agree on Travis Shaw. Whatever happens with Hanley and Panda, Shaw can play either position at least as well, likely better as he gets tbe reps. This means that, minimally, Shaw is as good or better off the bench for 1B and 3B as our favorite Brockstar, freeing him up for OF, 2B, SS, PR. Solid. He is also a smart hitter. We watched as really good pitchers adjusted to him and his #'s returned to earth, and we watched him adjust back and start hitting really good pitchers again. Good eye, smart hitter, good power, intelligent baseball head with pedigree, soft hands, accurate arm. I am fine with Hanley and/or Panda rebounding and fine if they don't. Either way, IMO, it is time to give Shaw credit for being a potentially very valuable player; and allow him the opportunity to demonstrate just how valuable he can become.
|
|
|
Post by mandelbro on Oct 9, 2015 11:00:00 GMT -5
Addition by subtraction. Both have to go, one way or another. If they can get someone decent in return, great. If not, release them. Money is no object to Henry, so that shouldn't matter. Forget the money. Look for the talent. The problem with this is that Hanley IS the talent. He's a career .327 BABIP hitter (and better than that from 2012 to today) who started the year mashing, crashed into a wall and finished with a .257 BABIP. This without him showing any change in terms of contact and swinging tendencies in the second half. He just stopped driving and lifting the ball, and hit a lot of ground balls. How could that possibly happen? Maybe a shoulder injury? Why are people so convinced that after a decade of being a fearsome offensive player, Hanley randomly turned into a melon this July?
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Oct 9, 2015 11:32:33 GMT -5
Addition by subtraction. Both have to go, one way or another. If they can get someone decent in return, great. If not, release them. Money is no object to Henry, so that shouldn't matter. Forget the money. Look for the talent. The problem with this is that Hanley IS the talent. He's a career .327 BABIP hitter (and better than that from 2012 to today) who started the year mashing, crashed into a wall and finished with a .257 BABIP. This without him showing any change in terms of contact and swinging tendencies in the second half. He just stopped driving and lifting the ball, and hit a lot of ground balls. How could that possibly happen? Maybe a shoulder injury? Why are people so convinced that after a decade of being a fearsome offensive player, Hanley randomly turned into a melon this July?
[/b] Hanley's apparent attitude on the field and at the plate were linked with the Sox downturn in many eyes....chicken and beer revisited. Honestly I expect both to be better players next year regardless. But will either show the necessary drive to satisfy management? Hanley was asked to lose 15-20 lbs. and Panda to no longer need to be hoisted on a meat-hook. Hanley has always appeared the reluctant malcontent and Panda's weight has long been an issue. I don't have much hope that either will metamorphose. For me color both long gone before their respective contracts are up and as soon as reasonably possible. No tears will be shed.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Oct 9, 2015 11:53:52 GMT -5
Well let's get this ironed out here - I'm not under the impression that this is even close to chicken and beer revisited. The issue is that he didn't put the time in to get better defensively, and that certainly irked some people, but I haven't seen that anyone has suggested this was a major clubhouse issue that caused the team's collapse. The bigger issue with Hanley is that not only was he bad defensively, but he wasn't hitting enough to justify it. Also, I think the thing about asking Hanley to lose weight may be getting misconstrued in a lot of eyes, so I'd like to see if we can clear that up too. You all may remember, in Spring Training, everyone said he came into camp jacked (ex: www.weei.com/sports/boston/baseball/red-sox/john-tomase/2015/03/04/hanley-ramirez-massive-and-red-sox-hope-his-mu). My impression was that he bulked up thinking that he wouldn't need to be able to move around as freely playing left field as he would have at short or third, NOT that he got horribly out of shape. Given reports that during his BP, he would just try to destroy everything, it sounds like his goal was to hit about 200 home runs this season. My interpretation of the weight issue is more of a "come back to camp in wide receiver shape rather than linebacker shape" sort of thing than "get your act together and come into camp in shape, you idiot." I certainly could be wrong about that though - has anyone seen anything that says otherwise?
|
|
|
Post by mandelbro on Oct 9, 2015 11:58:29 GMT -5
Hanley's apparent attitude on the field and at the plate were linked with the Sox downturn in many eyes....chicken and beer revisited. Honestly I expect both to be better players next year regardless. But will either show the necessary drive to satisfy management? Hanley was asked to lose 15-20 lbs. and Panda to no longer need to be hoisted on a meat-hook. Hanley has always appeared the reluctant malcontent and Panda's weight has long been an issue. I don't have much hope that either will metamorphose. For me color both long gone before their respective contracts are up and as soon as reasonably possible. No tears will be shed. You're 100% correct. Hanley DOES have an attitude. Panda's weight HAS long been an issue. But they do not have to metamorphose to be our best available option at their respective positions. Is Travis Shaw going to be a better option at 1B than Ramirez? Is Brock Holt/Deven Marrero going to be a better option at 3B than Pablo Sandoval? Are they such safer, smarter propositions that it is worth eating 7 figures a year on each guy for the privilege? Look, I'm not saying everything is rainbows and butterflies with Hanley. And if we can work out trades involving them, that make the team better, I'll be thrilled. It just seems to me that the "GET RID OF THEM!" sentiment is unfair - motivated by ignoring the considerable track record of the two veterans (and in Hanley's case at the plate, unfortunate circumstances), and ignoring the considerable downside/growing pains present in the rest of the young roster.
|
|
mobaz
Veteran
Posts: 2,753
|
Post by mobaz on Oct 9, 2015 12:02:56 GMT -5
Well let's get this ironed out here - I'm not under the impression that this is even close to chicken and beer revisited. The issue is that he didn't put the time in to get better defensively, and that certainly irked some people, I haven't seen that anyone has suggested this was a major clubhouse issue that caused the team's collapse. Also, I think the thing about asking Hanley to lose weight may be getting misconstrued in a lot of eyes, so I'd like to see if we can clear that up too. You all may remember, in Spring Training, everyone said he came into camp jacked (ex: www.weei.com/sports/boston/baseball/red-sox/john-tomase/2015/03/04/hanley-ramirez-massive-and-red-sox-hope-his-mu). My impression was that he bulked up thinking that he wouldn't need to be able to move around as freely playing left field as he would have at short or third, NOT that he got horribly out of shape. Given reports that during his BP, he would just try to destroy everything, it sounds like his goal was to hit about 200 home runs this season. My interpretation of the weight issue is more of a "come back to camp in wide receiver shape rather than linebacker shape" sort of thing than "get your act together and come into camp in shape, you idiot." I certainly could be wrong about that though - has anyone seen anything that says otherwise? That was my interpretation too. And I wonder if that was part of the hesitance in playing him at first this season was he built his body for the outfield (or maybe for backup DH) and wasn't going to have the range of motion at 1B to give it an honest try.
|
|
gerry
Veteran
Enter your message here...
Posts: 1,656
|
Post by gerry on Oct 9, 2015 12:15:54 GMT -5
Well let's get this ironed out here - I'm not under the impression that this is even close to chicken and beer revisited. The issue is that he didn't put the time in to get better defensively, and that certainly irked some people, I haven't seen that anyone has suggested this was a major clubhouse issue that caused the team's collapse. Also, I think the thing about asking Hanley to lose weight may be getting misconstrued in a lot of eyes, so I'd like to see if we can clear that up too. You all may remember, in Spring Training, everyone said he came into camp jacked (ex: www.weei.com/sports/boston/baseball/red-sox/john-tomase/2015/03/04/hanley-ramirez-massive-and-red-sox-hope-his-mu). My impression was that he bulked up thinking that he wouldn't need to be able to move around as freely playing left field as he would have at short or third, NOT that he got horribly out of shape. Given reports that during his BP, he would just try to destroy everything, it sounds like his goal was to hit about 200 home runs this season. My interpretation of the weight issue is more of a "come back to camp in wide receiver shape rather than linebacker shape" sort of thing than "get your act together and come into camp in shape, you idiot." I certainly could be wrong about that though - has anyone seen anything that says otherwise? Good points. Amidst the anger, snark and concern the messages I get from more reliable sources than NC and Felger, is that DD wants Panda to return to being nimble at 3B, and Hanley to become less statuesque, literally, in favor of becoming more limber and agile so he can play 1B. If they both put the work in and ome back to field their positions well, and hit to career norms (they are both young and talented enough for that) then the Sox are a better team. Calmer reporters (Speier, PeteAbe) also don't see Hanley's behavior as ovely newsworthy.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Oct 9, 2015 12:36:45 GMT -5
Where does the belief that Shaw cannot play 3B very well come from? I listened to nearly every game this year and when he was at third the announcers, who I think are pretty good, both said he played 3B very well. A number of times he was said to have made exceptional plays. He has good hands, a good arm, and good instincts. What he may lack is range but some of that can be made up for with positioning. I'm not saying he should be the 3B. I like him better at 1B. But I think he is viable defensively as the backup for 3B and occasional starter there. And, of course, he hit better than Sandoval. Whether he will do that next year is anyone's guess, but my guess is that he will. I doubt Sam Travis will be ready next year, except maybe for a late season call-up. Just as it is a big jump from A+ to AA, it is at least as big a jump from AA to AAA. Travis made the first jump quite well. The next one will be a better test. I've read the same things regarding Shaw not being able to play 3b, but recently I read a report that suggested he handled 3b just fine. It is his natural position. I agree with Mandlebro's position that we're probably going to have both Sandoval and Ramirez back next season, but I think Shaw exhibited a lot more offense than I would have thought possible this past season. I remind myself that WMB looked really good after that first season, too, but Shaw doesn't have a history of being as clueless about the strike zone as WMB was. I think there's a reasonable chance he could be a decent player next year, or at least be better than Sandoval or Ramirez. I'm still not convinced that Hanley's bat doesn't bounce back. He was hitting extremely well in April and from the time he had his collision with the low wall down the LF line in May, he stopped hitting. I don't think that's a coincidence. I think he can bounce back and I think Dombrowski had the right idea, wanting him to go back to being a hitter, than trying to be the incredible hulk, hitting nothing but homers. If Ramirez goes back to hitting that way the Sox have an offensive asset at 1b, although we don't now how he'd do defensively and his ability to stay healthy is always in question. Ultimately, I do think, if given a chance, that Sam Travis will force his way into Boston by the end of the season, if not sooner. His power is a little questionable but his hitting ability is there. If Ramirez hangs around and Ortiz ever acts his age, then Travis will ultimately wind up at 1b with Hanley DHing. If the Sox get more of the same from Sandoval, whether they're paying him or not, they need to look at what Shaw can do at 3b. In fact, I think he's playing fall ball this year, and spending time at 3b. I don't think it's far-fetched to think that the infield corners by next August could be Sam Travis at 1b and Travis Shaw at 3b. And that could still happen even with both Sandoval and Ramirez on the team. Dombrowski didn't sign them and I don't think he feels wedded to them. If they don't do the job and the Sox struggle, I would think DDo will look for alternatives and with their big contracts, he'll look towards his own team (Travis S) and farm system (S Travis) first to resolve the corner issues. Geez, this is a thread about Brian Johnson??? Alright then, glad nothing major showed up. Not convinced he's going to be pain free all year next year, though. I wouldn't dump others like Owen saying we have Johnson so we should be covered.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Oct 9, 2015 13:28:29 GMT -5
...so let's stay away from that meme.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Oct 9, 2015 13:38:19 GMT -5
...so let's stay away from that meme. I really don't know where it came from. No one was blaming Hanley for being fat, but that he didn't work hard on defense. What has changed?
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Oct 9, 2015 14:29:53 GMT -5
...so let's stay away from that meme. I really don't know where it came from. No one was blaming Hanley for being fat, but that he didn't work hard on defense. What has changed? It's the Hanley meme I'm talking about, the strawman that stalks the halls. Coming to you from the great Northwest
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Oct 9, 2015 15:25:46 GMT -5
Where does the belief that Shaw cannot play 3B very well come from? I listened to nearly every game this year and when he was at third the announcers, who I think are pretty good, both said he played 3B very well. A number of times he was said to have made exceptional plays. He has good hands, a good arm, and good instincts. What he may lack is range but some of that can be made up for with positioning. I'm not saying he should be the 3B. I like him better at 1B. But I think he is viable defensively as the backup for 3B and occasional starter there. And, of course, he hit better than Sandoval. Whether he will do that next year is anyone's guess, but my guess is that he will. I doubt Sam Travis will be ready next year, except maybe for a late season call-up. Just as it is a big jump from A+ to AA, it is at least as big a jump from AA to AAA. Travis made the first jump quite well. The next one will be a better test. I've read the same things regarding Shaw not being able to play 3b, but recently I read a report that suggested he handled 3b just fine. It is his natural position. I agree with Mandlebro's position that we're probably going to have both Sandoval and Ramirez back next season, but I think Shaw exhibited a lot more offense than I would have thought possible this past season. I remind myself that WMB looked really good after that first season, too, but Shaw doesn't have a history of being as clueless about the strike zone as WMB was. I think there's a reasonable chance he could be a decent player next year, or at least be better than Sandoval or Ramirez. I'm still not convinced that Hanley's bat doesn't bounce back. He was hitting extremely well in April and from the time he had his collision with the low wall down the LF line in May, he stopped hitting. I don't think that's a coincidence. I think he can bounce back and I think Dombrowski had the right idea, wanting him to go back to being a hitter, than trying to be the incredible hulk, hitting nothing but homers. If Ramirez goes back to hitting that way the Sox have an offensive asset at 1b, although we don't now how he'd do defensively and his ability to stay healthy is always in question. Ultimately, I do think, if given a chance, that Sam Travis will force his way into Boston by the end of the season, if not sooner. His power is a little questionable but his hitting ability is there. If Ramirez hangs around and Ortiz ever acts his age, then Travis will ultimately wind up at 1b with Hanley DHing. If the Sox get more of the same from Sandoval, whether they're paying him or not, they need to look at what Shaw can do at 3b. In fact, I think he's playing fall ball this year, and spending time at 3b. I don't think it's far-fetched to think that the infield corners by next August could be Sam Travis at 1b and Travis Shaw at 3b. And that could still happen even with both Sandoval and Ramirez on the team. Dombrowski didn't sign them and I don't think he feels wedded to them. If they don't do the job and the Sox struggle, I would think DDo will look for alternatives and with their big contracts, he'll look towards his own team (Travis S) and farm system (S Travis) first to resolve the corner issues. Geez, this is a thread about Brian Johnson??? Alright then, glad nothing major showed up. Not convinced he's going to be pain free all year next year, though. I wouldn't dump others like Owen saying we have Johnson so we should be covered. On board with that. In fact I strongly suspect Hanley was playing through pain and reduced function from that point forward.
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Oct 10, 2015 8:08:22 GMT -5
Hanley's apparent attitude on the field and at the plate were linked with the Sox downturn in many eyes....chicken and beer revisited. Honestly I expect both to be better players next year regardless. But will either show the necessary drive to satisfy management? Hanley was asked to lose 15-20 lbs. and Panda to no longer need to be hoisted on a meat-hook. Hanley has always appeared the reluctant malcontent and Panda's weight has long been an issue. I don't have much hope that either will metamorphose. For me color both long gone before their respective contracts are up and as soon as reasonably possible. No tears will be shed. You're 100% correct. Hanley DOES have an attitude. Panda's weight HAS long been an issue. But they do not have to metamorphose to be our best available option at their respective positions. Is Travis Shaw going to be a better option at 1B than Ramirez? Is Brock Holt/Deven Marrero going to be a better option at 3B than Pablo Sandoval? Are they such safer, smarter propositions that it is worth eating 7 figures a year on each guy for the privilege? Look, I'm not saying everything is rainbows and butterflies with Hanley. And if we can work out trades involving them, that make the team better, I'll be thrilled. It just seems to me that the "GET RID OF THEM!" sentiment is unfair - motivated by ignoring the considerable track record of the two veterans (and in Hanley's case at the plate, unfortunate circumstances), and ignoring the considerable downside/growing pains present in the rest of the young roster. Well, I am not disagreeing with you that they may be our best options in the near term. The perception of Hanley's attitude in the field, with reported disinterest in practicing to get better (which understandably irritated some players) and some history of being less than stellar as a teammate, I think that he would be gone in a minute if we had or could procure other options. The guy is getting paid north of 20M for goodness sake. The request for weight loss is an effort to restore athleticism not because he was fat. Panda was fat, has apparently always been fat and may continue that way. Maybe he has a faulty metabolism but here is another guy making 20M so you would think that he would try to be as good as he can be. He is wildly undisciplined at the plate too. That goes against the grain of Sox philosophy. My point is that neither of these guys displayed what I would want on my team in the form of attitude and commitment. I also think that the organization had some responsibility to monitor off-season workouts for both and did not do so. I hope that with DD in place --- the new sheriff --- these guys will come around. Both can't be worse than this year.
|
|
|