Register now to remove this ad

Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 111

Thread: Why not keep Ellsbury and Bradley together for years to come?

  1. #16
    All-Star Spitball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,530

    Re: Why not keep Ellsbury and Bradley together for years to come?

    Because of Scott Boras, I don't see Ellsbury returning to Boston after this season. Boras rarely changes his mode of opperation even after players like Michael Bourne and Kyle Lohse suffer from his strategies. Ellsbury will test the market unless he is injured again and needs to re-sign a one year contract to re-establish his value.

    That said, the Sox are in a hard place with Ellsbury. His trade value is hurt by Boras and the injuries. Actually, Ellsbury is also hurt by Boras and the injuries. He would be better off dumping Boras and re-signing with the Red Sox. As someone else said, his market will likely be limited to Seattle where he will likely be the next Chone Figgins.

    As for Bradley, the Sox would be fools to bring him north off a hot spring training. Spring training is too a small sample size to get excited over. He has been facing a variety of pitchers who are not all major league pitchers nor in mid-season form.

    In the spring of 2011, Dave Sappelt hit .564 (22-for-38), along with three homers and 12 RBI for the Cincinnati Reds. The previous year, he had been the Reds minor league hitter of the year. The Reds wisely resisted bringing him north off a hot spring. Later in the year, they did bring him up, and he was totally over-powered by actual big league pitchers who were in mid-season form. He was not really ready.

    Sappelt would eventually be a key prospects traded to Theo Epstein's Cubs a year ago for Sean Marshall. This spring, Sappelt has a .494 OPS and headed back to the minors leagues.

    Spring training is way too small a sample size to get excited over. Bradley will be the Sox center fielder eventually, but there is no reason to rush the guy. The Sox may surprise this season, but their future is probably not now.

    We may not like it, but the Sox are going to have to learn to play, if not Money Ball, at least Smart Ball. Times are changing.
    "As long as the general population is passive, apathetic, diverted to consumerism or hatred of the vulnerable, then the powerful can do as they please, and those who survive will be left to contemplate the outcome." - Noam Chomsky

  2. #17
    Deity VA Sox Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    15,729

    Re: Why not keep Ellsbury and Bradley together for years to come?

    Quote Originally Posted by Spitball View Post
    Because of Scott Boras, I don't see Ellsbury returning to Boston after this season. Boras rarely changes his mode of opperation even after players like Michael Bourne and Kyle Lohse suffer from his strategies. Ellsbury will test the market unless he is injured again and needs to re-sign a one year contract to re-establish his value.

    That said, the Sox are in a hard place with Ellsbury. His trade value is hurt by Boras and the injuries. Actually, Ellsbury is also hurt by Boras and the injuries. He would be better off dumping Boras and re-signing with the Red Sox. As someone else said, his market will likely be limited to Seattle where he will likely be the next Chone Figgins.

    As for Bradley, the Sox would be fools to bring him north off a hot spring training. Spring training is too a small sample size to get excited over. He has been facing a variety of pitchers who are not all major league pitchers nor in mid-season form.

    In the spring of 2011, Dave Sappelt hit .564 (22-for-38), along with three homers and 12 RBI for the Cincinnati Reds. The previous year, he had been the Reds minor league hitter of the year. The Reds wisely resisted bringing him north off a hot spring. Later in the year, they did bring him up, and he was totally over-powered by actual big league pitchers who were in mid-season form. He was not really ready.

    Sappelt would eventually be a key prospects traded to Theo Epstein's Cubs a year ago for Sean Marshall. This spring, Sappelt has a .494 OPS and headed back to the minors leagues.

    Spring training is way too small a sample size to get excited over. Bradley will be the Sox center fielder eventually, but there is no reason to rush the guy. The Sox may surprise this season, but their future is probably not now.

    We may not like it, but the Sox are going to have to learn to play, if not Money Ball, at least Smart Ball. Times are changing.
    Great points/post. You had me at "Because of Scott Boras I don't see Ellsbury returning after this season".

  3. #18
    Your pal, Pal Palodios's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    13,946

    Re: Why not keep Ellsbury and Bradley together for years to come?

    Quote Originally Posted by BSN07 View Post
    Depends on his season. If it's a good one, Boras will be able to sell him to some offensively starved team. If he has a bad year he will probably get a pillow contract somewhere. I still think he signs with Seattle(lots of money, need offense, can't attract the elite talent) or the Rangers possibly.

    In 74 games last year, he hit only 4 home runs. In spring training so far, he has hit .214, with no triples, home runs, or stolen bases. Unless he lights the world on fire, no one is going to look at the last four seasons and ignore the two bad ones. His talent is so physical that if any part of him is nagging, his stats suffer severely.

  4. #19
    Deity BSN07's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    10,889

    Re: Why not keep Ellsbury and Bradley together for years to come?

    Quote Originally Posted by Palodios View Post
    In 74 games last year, he hit only 4 home runs. In spring training so far, he has hit .214, with no triples, home runs, or stolen bases. Unless he lights the world on fire, no one is going to look at the last four seasons and ignore the two bad ones. His talent is so physical that if any part of him is nagging, his stats suffer severely.
    If he's great he's gone. If he sucks he's gone. If he is ok and takes a Bourn type contract then maybe he stays. That about sums it up.

  5. #20

    Re: Why not keep Ellsbury and Bradley together for years to come?

    You cannot fault Boras for what he does. Guys hire him to get the most money they can get without regard to anything else, for the most part. The only guy who I can remember under Boras' guise who didn't go big money and stayed home was Tek. I think Ells is gone at yrs end regardless. If he has a great yr, he's dealt at the deadline. If he has a moderate yr, he's gone after the yr. if he sucks, he'll look for a pillow contract in a lefty hitters park to recoup his value. I'll tell you what, if he sucks in 2013, don't be surprised to see him sign a 1 yr contract in the Bronx to boost his value
    The rebuild is complete.

  6. #21
    Deity BSN07's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    10,889

    Re: Why not keep Ellsbury and Bradley together for years to come?

    Quote Originally Posted by jacksonianmarch View Post
    You cannot fault Boras for what he does. Guys hire him to get the most money they can get without regard to anything else, for the most part. The only guy who I can remember under Boras' guise who didn't go big money and stayed home was Tek. I think Ells is gone at yrs end regardless. If he has a great yr, he's dealt at the deadline. If he has a moderate yr, he's gone after the yr. if he sucks, he'll look for a pillow contract in a lefty hitters park to recoup his value. I'll tell you what, if he sucks in 2013, don't be surprised to see him sign a 1 yr contract in the Bronx to boost his value
    No I don't fault Boras at all. He is the best at what he does. The man is a genius from an agent stand point. But I don't forget that as soon as one of my teams players joins his agency.

  7. #22
    Deity VA Sox Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    15,729

    Re: Why not keep Ellsbury and Bradley together for years to come?

    Quote Originally Posted by BSN07 View Post
    No I don't fault Boras at all. He is the best at what he does. The man is a genius from an agent stand point. But I don't forget that as soon as one of my teams players joins his agency.
    I agree with you. Don't think anyone was faulting Boras. Just pointing out the facts.

  8. #23
    Deity VA Sox Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    15,729

    Re: Why not keep Ellsbury and Bradley together for years to come?

    Jackie Bradley Jr. in Opening Day mix

    Posted by Peter Abraham, Globe Staff March 17, 2013 11:31 AM


    FORT MYERS, Fla. The odds are against Jackie Bradley Jr. being on the Opening Day roster. He has played only 61 games at Double A and the Red Sox have been traditionally cautious with their young players.

    But with David Ortiz headed for the disabled list and Stephen Drew going in that direction, the Red Sox have two unexpected openings on their roster. All Bradley has done is hit .457/.568/.600 and play Gold Glove-caliber defense in the outfield.

    Could he make the team?

    "Thats a hell of a question, manager John Farrell said. Weve got two weeks to determine that.

    Bradley could start in left field if the Red Sox use Jonny Gomes as the DH. If Ortiz is going to be out more than a few weeks, that becomes a viable option.

    "Hes not on the roster right now. Hes have to be added, obviously. What the counter move to that would be, would be factored into this. But you cant deny the fact hes had a hell of a spring training," Farrell said. "The bottom line thing would be with any young player, whether its Jackie or any other position player when they come to the big leagues you want to make sure they get regular at-bats.

    "If those are there, they become part of the equation. But I think most importantly, hes doing whatever he can to impact a decision.

    Starting Bradley in the big leagues also would mean starting his service time clock and that could result in his achieving free agency a year earlier. But are the Red Sox a last place team with fading popularity in a position to worry about six years down the road?

    In the next two weeks, as pitching improves, Bradley will be tested.

    "The one thing weve always focused on is when he starts to face pitchers that are up against the start of the season, as their stuff is sharpened. Facing quality guys, whether its the early part of the game or deeper into the game. That decision is ongoing. That situation is ongoing and ultimately a decision is in the near future here," Farrell said.

    Players like Mike Trout, Bryce Harper and Manny Machado have changed the face of their respective teams. Farrell acknowledged that is a factor, too.

    "I think young talented players bring an energy that, if you have the right mix with a veteran group is definitely a benefit. Thats going to be unique to the combination of players that are at hand," he said.

    Bradley was supposed to be in minor league camp by now. But as injuries mount, his chances get a little better.

  9. #24

    Re: Why not keep Ellsbury and Bradley together for years to come?

    Quote Originally Posted by a700hitter View Post
    I agree. I think he is a premier talent. He has all the tools except a strong arm. He is far better than Bourn. Ells has had a few bad freak injuries that are not chronic conditions, so he is no bigger a health risk than anyone else. If he has a big season, it will confirm his status as a star player. A core of Ells, Pedroia, Middlebrooks and Bradley should produce a dynamic offense for several seasons.
    I also think he is a premier talent and I was overjoyed when he was brought up in 2007 and set the league on fire that September and later in the World Series. Those two major injuries were very freakish, wierd and off the wall, but what concerned me was how long it took him to mend. This year is the key. If he rakes he will get a big contract and I wouldn't mind seeing him in the same outfield with Bradley for five or six more years.

    Here's my fear, though. From the rumors I've read about, from some of the things posters have missiled the past year or so and from the silence of the Red Sox front office, it hints that Ellsbury wants out of Boston, will give us no home discount, and that the Red Sox will tender him a big deal. I also don't think he has to do what he did in 2011 to get teams interested. If he hits something like 310, hits 20 or so homers and steals 40 bases he will get a sizable offer. If he gets hurt again, though and misses significant action, he may just sign a parachute contract with some team for a year and hope he can cash in the following year after an injury free and production season.

  10. #25
    Deity VA Sox Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    15,729

    Re: Why not keep Ellsbury and Bradley together for years to come?

    The Jackie Bradley conundrum


    Posted by Peter Abraham, Globe Staff March 21, 2013 08:45 AM


    FORT MYERS, Fla. — If the idea was to pick the 25 best players, Jackie Bradley Jr. would make the Red Sox. He has been that good in spring training.

    But it's rarely that simple with baseball.

    The reason the Red Sox have a decision to make is buried within the pages of baseball's collective bargaining agreement and the rules for free agency.

    Players become eligible for free agency after six full seasons of service time in the major leagues. The day a player appears in his first game, his "clock" starts. Players watch that clock intently knowing that it takes six years for them to gain some degree of control over their careers.

    If Bradley starts the season with the Red Sox and sticks with them, he would become a free agent after the 2018 season. Because he is represented by Scott Boras, it's reasonable to assume that Bradley would then go into the open market to determine his worth.

    However if the Red Sox were to keep Bradley in the minors for 11 days to start the season, he would not become eligible for free agency until after the 2019 season.

    This is why, for instance, the Angels did not promote Mike Trout until April 28 last season.

    The Red Sox could, in theory, have Bradley start the season with them and stop his clock later in the season by sending him to the minors for 20 days. That also would preserve a year.

    The issue then becomes what if Bradley is so good that sending him down hurts the team? It might be a lot easier to send him down now than later on.

    A few other factors that weigh into the decision:

    • This discussion is not even being held if David Ortiz were healthy because there would be nowhere for Bradley to play. But with Ortiz expected to miss anywhere from two weeks to a month (at least), the Sox could play Bradley in right field, shift Shane Victorino to left and use Jonny Gomes as the designated hitter.

    • This discussion is not even being held if they Red Sox had some other player in camp who was presenting a compelling case to stick. But if Bradley is sent down, that probably means Daniel Nava, Ryan Sweeney, Mike Carp or Lyle Overbay makes the team.

    Nava has been the best of the four and has shown he can hit righthanders. But this also is a player who has hit .243 over two seasons.

    • The Red Sox are battling a serious problem with public perception. Their fans are not buying tickets or watching on television at the rates they once did. The team has been perceived as boring before it plays a game. Bradley can change that. He's a fun player to watch, he's young and he has a personality.

    How many players do the Red Sox have with even two of those qualities? It's a short list.

    Is that a good reason to lose a year of control? Surely not. But 90 percent of fans don't care about the collective bargaining agreement and 2019. They want to watch something interesting on NESN in 2013 and Sox want them to buy tickets and drink overpriced beer.

    If you stopped the average Sully on the street outside Fenway Park and asked him what he thought of John Henry, the answer would be that he's cheap and cares more about Liverpool. That is beyond stupid, of course, given the payroll of the Red Sox.

    But keeping Bradley would give the impression that the Red Sox are all in. It's dumb, but you know it's true.

    • Here's an interesting question: What would hurt the bottom line of the Red Sox more, a 3-8 start to this season or having to (theoretically) pay a lot of money to keep Bradley for the 2019 season when he becomes a free agent a year early? If this team starts 3-8, Fenway could be a ghost town in the spring. The very last thing this team needs is another slow start.

    • Let's say Bradley is a free agent a year early. It's not the like Red Sox are some low-budget team with no chance of keeping him. There have been some Boras clients (Jason Varitek and Jered Weaver come to mind), who make deals to stay.

    Bradley is not a Boras drone. If he likes Boston and wants to stay, they'll figure out a deal. They figured out a reasonable deal when they drafted him.

    • GM Ben Cherington is the guy who will make this call. Sure, it's easy to say that the right thing to do is send Bradley to the minors. But Cherington isn't going to be the GM in 2014 if the 2013 Red Sox fall on their face. Is he in a position to worry about 2019?

    It's too bad the decision is not simple because Bradley has done everything he can to make the team and the decision is far more involved than that.

    Prediction: The Sox will send Bradley to the minors and see what transpires after 11 days. Roster management has long been paramount for them and nothing indicates that will change.

    The one caveat is that John Henry, who really is a baseball fan, might think like a baseball fan and tell them to keep the kid. After all, maybe he doesn't think he'll own the team in 2019.

  11. #26
    Triple A rorschach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Arcola, Illinois
    Posts
    76

    Re: Why not keep Ellsbury and Bradley together for years to come?

    Quote Originally Posted by Palodios View Post
    In 74 games last year, he hit only 4 home runs. In spring training so far, he has hit .214, with no triples, home runs, or stolen bases. Unless he lights the world on fire, no one is going to look at the last four seasons and ignore the two bad ones. His talent is so physical that if any part of him is nagging, his stats suffer severely.
    Sums up Ellsbury as a player perfectly, he just seems so frail. One things for sure, if he doesn't put up a MVP caliber year, he will end up with the same kind of consideration Bourne got and Loshe is getting. This time next year Jaco might just be a player without a team.
    Long live Pedro Martinez! Long live the bloody sock!

    Red Sox World Series Championships in the last ten years 3 (2004, 2007 & 2013)

  12. #27
    Fight the Hate Dojji's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    18,366

    Re: Why not keep Ellsbury and Bradley together for years to come?

    I was thinking more along the lines of Trot Nixon actually. I am still amazed at just how quickly Trot disappeared from baseball due in large part to his injuries.

    Wouldn't be too shocked if Daniel Nava had done enough to crack the roster TBPH, at least to the point where he breaks camp with the team to allow the team the luxury of starting Bradley's clock when they want to. He's a platoon hitter whose platoon advantage plays well for what the Sox need right now, and he's done everything the team asked of him. If we're looking for a guy who's going to play off the bench he's probably as good as anyone we have, since I don't think you bring Bradley up and sit him on the bench.
    If history tells us anything, the path to redeption for any bad baseball team is marked with a deep rotation of durable starters, a world class defense in both infield and outfield, a lineup that can generate runs in more than one way, a bullpen that won't steal defeat from the jaws of victory, and a top end catcher to hold the whole package together. These are the conditions by which victory is achieved, anything that does not accomplish these objectives is a waste of resources.

  13. #28

    Re: Why not keep Ellsbury and Bradley together for years to come?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dojji View Post
    I was thinking more along the lines of Trot Nixon actually. I am still amazed at just how quickly Trot disappeared from baseball due in large part to his injuries.

    Wouldn't be too shocked if Daniel Nava had done enough to crack the roster TBPH, at least to the point where he breaks camp with the team to allow the team the luxury of starting Bradley's clock when they want to. He's a platoon hitter whose platoon advantage plays well for what the Sox need right now, and he's done everything the team asked of him. If we're looking for a guy who's going to play off the bench he's probably as good as anyone we have, since I don't think you bring Bradley up and sit him on the bench.
    I'm feeling like Nava could be a platoon partner with Gomes. He has little power but his OBP against righties is fantastic and he's not a butcher in LF.
    BornToRun and Taylor Swift For King & Queen of Talksox!

    Now please go ahead and introduce yourself to Taylor. We're going to get married, have 10 kids, and teach them how to dream.

  14. #29
    Legend NativeBostonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Dahlonega, GA
    Posts
    5,975

    Re: Why not keep Ellsbury and Bradley together for years to come?

    Did you guys hear that he got hurt again? Something is wrong with his ankle. This kid is made of glass. The Red Sox should trade him while they can get something decent out of it.
    "It happens to everybody, man. He's had 60 at-bats. A couple of years ago, I had 60 at-bats, and I was hitting .170, and everyone was ready to kill me, too. And what happened? Laser show. So, relax."

  15. #30
    Deity VA Sox Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    15,729

    Re: Why not keep Ellsbury and Bradley together for years to come?

    Ellsbury injures right heel

    Posted by Nick Cafardo, Globe Staff March 24, 2013 01:43 PM

    CLEARWATER, Fla. - Jacoby Ellsbury left the game in the second inning, after jamming his right heel trying to get back to first base on a pickoff throw in the first inning.

    The Red Sox announced that Ellsbury left the game for precautionary reasons. He will be re-examined tomorrow.

    Shane Victorino moved from right to center and Bryce Brentz went in to play right.

    Ellsbury had reached on catcher's interference before attempting his first stolen base after that and was thrown out by Humberto Quintero.

    We’ll have more when we receive some information.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •