DL
John Vamp
- Matsuzaka
- Baldelli
- Lowrie
- Lugo (yes, he's an important player)
Of course, I'm not even counting Smoltz. But already the injury bug
has hit the Red Sox pretty hard.
John
Raymond O'Hara
"John Vamp" <jvamp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:d5637f97-b527-41e9...@z5g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
has Rocco been DLed?
and Lugo is coming off of it
wayback1918
Kotsay (how soon they forget)
gazer220
Soon?? Didn't he sign, and then immediately have surgery? Never at
ST? That was a looonng time ago.
BTT
SOX ARE FINE IN '09!!
John Vamp
wrote:
> "John Vamp" <jvampate...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Rocco has been DL'ed. Lugo isn't coming off it any time soon, at
least so far as I know. Amazing to say, but right now the Sox really
need Lugo. <gulp>
John
Raymond O'Hara
John
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
lugo is starting his rehab in pawtucket and he'll be back very soon.
rocco didn't seem badly hurt and tito didn't seemed optomistic about him in
the post game press conference.
Magnus, Robot Fighter
Green is already superior to 2008 Lugo.
Magnus, Robot Fighter
errrr...why? Despite the E's, Green looks better than Lugo ever did
last year.
wayback1918
>
> - Show quoted text -
Mr Green has slipped back into what he always was. A very marginal
back up infielder who...if he is on your roster.....a team would
always want to upgrade. A very precarious postion to be in.
Lugo (2008 edition) would not be adequate either. If he plays at that
level then the Red Sox would need to look at other alternatives.
Now if he is the same guy that came into spring training, in great
shape and highly motivated, looking like he was going play like Lugo
(2006 edition (first half)) then he is so far above whatever Nick
Green could give you it not even a question.
Louis Martel
Where did this info come from ? Checked the Globe's Sox info, ESPN
baseball, RedSox.com, no info about his being put on DL.
"Sweet Lou"
Dano
Yeah? Did you get a load of Gil Velasquez? Yikes! How does he even make
AAA?
I like Green alright...more as a utility guy...but depth at middle infield
right now really sucks. I'll gladly take Lugo for now...but that must be
addressed.
Dano
Vamp is clearly mistaken. They're still calling it a mild muscle
strain...unrelated (they say) to the ongoing issue he has. Hopefully that's
so. I also saw they may call up Bailey.
http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/articles/2009/04/21/surgery_likely_for_lowrie/?page=2
"Nothing official had been decided yesterday, though Jeff Bailey was removed
from the lineup in Pawtucket in the top of the ninth inning, and could be
the replacement if Baldelli is placed on the disabled list. The only
outfielders on the 40-man roster who are not on the active roster are Mark
Kotsay and Jonathan Van Every, both of whom are injured."
S/B 954RR
"John Vamp" <jvamp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:d5637f97-b527-41e9...@z5g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
> Already the Sox have a bunch of important players on the DL:
>
> - Matsuzaka
> - Baldelli
> - Lowrie
> - Lugo (yes, he's an important player)
In what regard?
John Vamp
> "John Vamp" <jvampate...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:d5637f97-b527-41e9...@z5g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Already the Sox have a bunch of important players on the DL:
>
> > - Matsuzaka
> > - Baldelli
> > - Lowrie
> > - Lugo (yes, he's an important player)
>
> In what regard?
In the regard that Lowrie may be done for several months and, even
though he's been ok so far, Nick Green is *not* a better player than
Julio Lugo.
John
John Vamp
> Louis Martel wrote:
> > Vamp " Rocco has been DL'ed"
>
> > Where did this info come from ? Checked the Globe's Sox info, ESPN
> > baseball, RedSox.com, no info about his being put on DL.
>
> Vamp is clearly mistaken. They're still calling it a mild muscle
> strain...unrelated (they say) to the ongoing issue he has. Hopefully that's
> so. I also saw they may call up Bailey.
From: http://www2.nesn.com/boston-red-sox/2009/04/21/report-baldelli-headed-to-dl/:
"A day being removed from Monday’s 12-1 win over the Orioles, Red Sox
outfielder Rocco Baldelli has been placed on the 15-day disabled list
due to an injured left hamstring. The Sox have recalled Jeff
Baileyfrom Pawtucket to take Baldelli’s roster spot."
John
Red Sox Rule Yankees Suck
Brady, the C's lose KG, the Sox lose Dice-K. Must be something in the
water. Better hope nothing happens to any of the Bruins players.
Steve Robbins
> "John Vamp" <jvamp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:d5637f97-b527-41e9...@z5g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
>> Already the Sox have a bunch of important players on the DL:
>>
>> - Matsuzaka
>> - Baldelli
>> - Lowrie
>> - Lugo (yes, he's an important player)
>
> In what regard?
He takes up a roster spot.
--
The Unofficial a.s.b.b-r Reference Page
http://redsox.robbins-ut.com/index.html
Steve Robbins
> S/B 954RR wrote:
>> "John Vamp" <jvamp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:d5637f97-b527-41e9...@z5g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
>>> Already the Sox have a bunch of important players on the DL:
>>>
>>> - Matsuzaka
>>> - Baldelli
>>> - Lowrie
>>> - Lugo (yes, he's an important player)
>>
>> In what regard?
>
> He takes up a roster spot.
>
Looked it up and I was wrong. None last year but at least one each of
the previous nine years. Close but no cigar.
Steve Robbins
> Steve Robbins wrote:
>> S/B 954RR wrote:
>>> "John Vamp" <jvamp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:d5637f97-b527-41e9...@z5g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
>>>> Already the Sox have a bunch of important players on the DL:
>>>>
>>>> - Matsuzaka
>>>> - Baldelli
>>>> - Lowrie
>>>> - Lugo (yes, he's an important player)
>>>
>>> In what regard?
>>
>> He takes up a roster spot.
>>
>
> Looked it up and I was wrong. None last year but at least one each of
> the previous nine years. Close but no cigar.
>
S/B 954RR
John
_____________________________________________________
He is a better player than the Lugo we've seen so far. Both are
unimpressive.
S/B 954RR
"Steve Robbins" <srobb...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:gslosp$rr7$1...@news.motzarella.org...
> Steve Robbins wrote:
>> Steve Robbins wrote:
>>> S/B 954RR wrote:
>>>> "John Vamp" <jvamp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:d5637f97-b527-41e9...@z5g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
>>>>> Already the Sox have a bunch of important players on the DL:
>>>>>
>>>>> - Matsuzaka
>>>>> - Baldelli
>>>>> - Lowrie
>>>>> - Lugo (yes, he's an important player)
>>>>
>>>> In what regard?
>>>
>>> He takes up a roster spot.
>>>
>>
>> Looked it up and I was wrong. None last year but at least one each of
>> the previous nine years. Close but no cigar.
>>
> Now I replied to the wrong thread. Strike Two!
>
John Vamp
> "John Vamp" <jvampate...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1da9f359-1cee-42d7...@q16g2000yqg.googlegroups.com...
> On Apr 21, 2:42 pm, "S/B 954RR" <jtibb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > "John Vamp" <jvampate...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:d5637f97-b527-41e9...@z5g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > Already the Sox have a bunch of important players on the DL:
>
> > > - Matsuzaka
> > > - Baldelli
> > > - Lowrie
> > > - Lugo (yes, he's an important player)
>
> > In what regard?
>
> In the regard that Lowrie may be done for several months and, even
> though he's been ok so far, Nick Green is *not* a better player than
> Julio Lugo.
>
> John
> _____________________________________________________
>
> He is a better player than the Lugo we've seen so far. Both are
> unimpressive.
Nick Green has put up this line for the Red Sox: 25 ab, 4 r, 6 h, 0
hr, 3 rbi, .240/.321/.320/.641, and has made two errors in 38 chances
(.947 fielding percentage).
Last year, as dreadful as Lugo was, put up this line: 261 ab, 27 r,
70 h, 1 hr, 22 rbi, .268/.355/.330/.685, and made 16 errors in 292
chances (.945 fielding percentage).
So they are virtually equal in the field, despite what it may "feel"
like. And Lugo last year was a significantly better offensive
performer than Green has been so far, again, despite what it may
"feel" like.
In short, your statement, "He is a better player than the Lugo we've
seen so far." is incorrect. Your statement, "Both are unimpressive."
is correct.
But if, despite the actual evidence that refutes your claim, you still
wish to think that, that's fine. Let's take it down a level. The
backup to Nick Green is who, exactly? Gil Velazquez, that's who. If
Green gets pinch-hit for, or tweaks an ankle, or whatever, now we're
talking about relying on Gil Velazquez. Please don't tell me that you
think that *he* has been better than Lugo was. I'd rather have a
tandem of Lugo/Green than Green/Velazquez.
Don't take this as meaning I'm a Lugo fan. I'm not...I want Lowrie
up, healthy, and succeeding for the Red Sox. But if the options are
Lugo, Green, or Velazquez, I'll take Lugo first, backed up by Green.
John
Steve Robbins
one of the two with 10 years of triples. I went and looked it up and
being in too much of a hurry, I selected this thread that I had also
replied to and then stated I was wrong. So I was correcting myself so
no one would be confused. Seems I failed. Strike three. :-)
wayback1918
> On Apr 21, 11:34 pm, "S/B 954RR" <jtibb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "John Vamp" <jvampate...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:1da9f359-1cee-42d7...@q16g2000yqg.googlegroups.com...
> > On Apr 21, 2:42 pm, "S/B 954RR" <jtibb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > "John Vamp" <jvampate...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> > >news:d5637f97-b527-41e9...@z5g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > > Already the Sox have a bunch of important players on the DL:
>
> > > > - Matsuzaka
> > > > - Baldelli
> > > > - Lowrie
> > > > - Lugo (yes, he's an important player)
>
> > > In what regard?
>
> > In the regard that Lowrie may be done for several months and, even
> > though he's been ok so far, Nick Green is *not* a better player than
> > Julio Lugo.
>
> > John
> > _____________________________________________________
>
> > He is a better player than the Lugo we've seen so far. Both are
> > unimpressive.
>
> Nick Green has put up this line for the Red Sox: 25 ab, 4 r, 6 h, 0
> hr, 3 rbi, .240/.321/.320/.641, and has made two errors in 38 chances
> (.947 fielding percentage).
>
Yes...but don't you think stats at this point in the season are
meaningless? <g>
Seriously in many cases the small sample of this season is just
additional evidence of what has gone on in previous years.
Let's say Ortiz had an off year in 2008....and then lets say he didn't
look comfortable in spring training.....so then is first 13 games of
2009 a 'small sample' or just further confirmation of what people have
observed over the last two years?
S/B 954RR
S/B 954RR
Don't take this as meaning I'm a Lugo fan. I'm not...I want Lowrie
up, healthy, and succeeding for the Red Sox. But if the options are
Lugo, Green, or Velazquez, I'll take Lugo first, backed up by Green.
____________________________
I snipped your stats because I'll agree with you that Lugo does look better
and probably is. I guess it is appearances, they both appear dismal with a
bit to me but Green appeared more steady to me defensively so that is why I
suggested he is better.
wayback1918
> "John Vamp" <jvampate...@gmail.com> wrote in message
It's tough when you stick up for a player's defense then he goes out
and makes two errors.
S/B 954RR
"wayback1918" <wayba...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:9153ce7b-12b2-4147...@s20g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
Yeah, appearances can be deceiving. Hopefully they have an ace up their
sleeve and we'll have a SS from outside the organization to help out
Christina
wrote:
Well SB the 5 errors are ALOT, Green is hitting very well but the
fielding errors are bad, he has shown enough so far for to be Lugo's
back up I think.
McDuck
3 errors