Red Sox Notes: Stanton, Okajima, Lineup

With apologies to the Dropkick Murphys, let's ship up to Boston for some news from the (presumptive) AL East favorites…

  • Mike Stanton hit two homers and drove in seven runs against the Red Sox today in Grapefruit League play, prompting WEEI.com's Alex Speier to recall how the Sox pursued Stanton two seasons ago.  When the Red Sox were trying to deal Manny Ramirez in 2008, they attempted to arrange a multi-team trade that would have seen both Stanton and Jason Bay end up in Boston.  The Marlins, however, weren't interested in dealing their young slugger.
  • Hideki Okajima isn't used to having to fight for a bullpen job, but the Japanese left-hander is determined to stay on the roster, writes MLB.com's Ian Browne.
  • Boston's regular lineup is heavy with left-handed hitters, but Gordon Edes of ESPNBoston.com thinks the offense will be potent enough to overcome the lefty-righty disparity.
  • Speaking of Edes, he took part in a fan chat on ESPN Boston today discussing such topics as Lars Anderson's trade value, whether the Red Sox may try to acquire a catcher, and the futures of both David Ortiz and Terry Francona in Boston.


Leave a Reply

117 Comments on "Red Sox Notes: Stanton, Okajima, Lineup"


Holidayjesus
4 years 5 months ago

>mfw i heard stanton and redsox in same sentence

4 years 5 months ago

I don’t really blame the Marlins, they have the outfield version of Longoria on their hands.

ultimate913
4 years 5 months ago

Except for getting him to sign the ridiculously team friendly contract extension.

4 years 5 months ago

He’s still not even arbitration eligible, so I think they’re in the clear for at least a couple of years.

ultimate913
4 years 5 months ago

That’s the thing though. Longoria signed the extension 6 days(!!!!) after his debut. That’s not a typo. His debut was on April 12th, 2008 and he signed the extension on April 18th, 2008.

jwredsox
4 years 5 months ago

Stanton and Longoria are nothing alike… Longoria is closer to a Braun and Stanton an Adam Dunn

4 years 5 months ago

Not necessarily statistically the same, but both are young, VERY young players, currently low-cost, that have star power already.

jwredsox
4 years 5 months ago

oh alright. That makes more sense haha

CitizenSnips
4 years 5 months ago

So glad I have Stanton in my keeper league.

CitizenSnips
4 years 5 months ago

Is it sad that I consider my comment to like ratio like K/9? I can’t be the only one who kinda does this.

ludafish
4 years 5 months ago

i just like your name

start_wearing_purple
start_wearing_purple
4 years 5 months ago

Unless Ortiz is willing to sign a ridiculously team friendly contract, I think it’s his last year in Boston. Rumors are that Boston wants the DH spot to be more of a utility position and Ortiz certainly can’t provide that.

Interesting thought though, next year the Red Sox are expect to start 2 rookies as regulars, Iglesias and Kalish… I’m wondering if the DH spot might also go to a rookie like Reddick, Linares, Anderson, or Lavarnway.

MaineSox
4 years 5 months ago

I’ve been kind of wondering the same thing. I’m not sold on Linares personally and I don’t think Reddick hits enough to DH, but I have wondered about Lavarnway or Anderson if he goes back to hitting like he’s shown that he can. I’m still kind of hoping Lavarnway progresses enough on defense to stick at catcher though.

start_wearing_purple
start_wearing_purple
4 years 5 months ago

I more brought up Reddick because he could also fill the 4th outfielder slot though he’d have to show significant improvement in his hitting in AAA. As for Linares I think he just hasn’t had any real chance to show what he’s got, it’s pretty much his make or break year… I’d put him as a dark horse to take over right field next year. But of everyone I mentioned I think Lavarnway is the most likely to take over at DH.

MaineSox
4 years 5 months ago

I’m skeptical about Linares right now because he’s already 26, most would be in the majors at that age so good numbers in the minors don’t impress me as much. Plus everything we’ve seen from him so far is in really small samples, I guess I’m mostly waiting to see what he does over a longer period of time in the higher minors before I think much of him. He’s shown pretty good stuff I’m just not sold yet.

It’s probably not likely to happen but I’d like to see Anderson as DH and Lavarnway at catcher personally.

start_wearing_purple
start_wearing_purple
4 years 5 months ago

As you said, small samples. And as a guy who’s already 26, I’m a little insulted by the insinuations that he’s already over the hill ;-). Seriously though, I think this is Linares’ year to prove himself as a starter next year or be traded for a C prospect.

MaineSox
4 years 5 months ago

Don’t worry I’m only a few months from 26 myself. But yeah, I think you’re right about him having to prove himself this year, and he very well could, I’m just gonna wait and see.

I also wonder about Lowrie as DH, not that I think he continues to play like he did the last half of last year, but he could be DH and play all over the infield to give any of those guys a “day off” at DH. Kind of a rotating DH.

start_wearing_purple
start_wearing_purple
4 years 5 months ago

Call me crazy but I think the Sox will utilize Lowrie as a Bill Hall/super-utility type player. Either that or build up his value and trade him.

MaineSox
4 years 5 months ago

You mean they’ll get him to play the OF too, or Bill Hall minus the OF?

start_wearing_purple
start_wearing_purple
4 years 5 months ago

I thought I heard the Sox were training him in the outfield. I could be wrong, maybe they just want him to be able to play the infield, discounting pitcher and catcher.

MaineSox
4 years 5 months ago

Hadn’t heard that but it would be an awesome idea if they do plan on keeping him as a utility player.

johnsilver
4 years 5 months ago

I would like to see Boston go ahead and fast track Lavarnway with his bat and stop holding him back because of his catching skills. Let him learn some at AAA and see if he can DH maybe next year and backup C, or be a 3rd C and take over for Ortiz if he rakes at AA and promote him early.

Lavarnway lost major time already in 2009 at Greeneville when he was too advance offensively and last year spending over half the year at Salem because his defensive skills were not all there. His bat is going to get him to Boston, not his glove and they keep holding him back. Wagner is not going to help Boston and neither is Hoover. Let him split time with Expo at AAA to start the season even and they alternate DH/C duties.. Get him ready.. His bat can handle AAA as it is.

MaineSox
4 years 5 months ago

I don’t see that they are being all that slow with him. 2009 was his first full season and he played it in single A Greenville; last year was only his second full season and he ended it in AA Portland. I think it’s pretty safe to assume that he will end this year in AAA, and maybe a September call-up, in just his third full season, that’s not super fast but it isn’t uncommon by any means. As you said, his bat seems like it could handle AAA, but why push him more than you need to with the bat while he should be focusing on his defense?

johnsilver
4 years 5 months ago

Same reason said earlier.. he can get his instruction on defense from Tuck at AAA just as easy at AAA level and face more advanced pitchers to hone hit batting skills. ortiz will probably be playing his last year in 2011 and Lavarnway is a viable option to replace him and is an excellent choice.. he can DH and also would solve another sore spot for Boston being able to play some backup catcher for them as well next season.. 2 positions at once.

BTW: What I meant at greeneville in 2009 was he was clearly too advance for the level.. he was one of the best hitters by far in the ivy league, started out in low ABall, led Boston in 2009 in many categories being ‘stuck” all season in low A ball splitting time with fed-X all year. maybe because Expo was above him, but regardless he was vastly superior skill wise with the bat for the level.

dc21892
4 years 5 months ago

Nelson Cruz was a late bloomer.

0bsessions
4 years 5 months ago

As was Kevin Youkilis.

Some guys just don’t really develop as young as others. Now, 99% of the time, a guy that old who’s not close to the majors is going to be a bust, but if there’s potential, there’s potential.

MaineSox
4 years 5 months ago

Agreed, some guys certainly do develop later than others, I’m just not sold that Linares is that guy. Not because I don’t think he is any good but because we don’t really have any idea how good he is; he’s 26 and has had barely 100 at-bats, we just don’t know yet.

MB923
4 years 5 months ago

Kalish isn’t a rookie (well qualified as a rookie that is)

Backup_Slider
4 years 5 months ago

Well, clearly the Red Sox should have offered Francona to the Marlins.

4 years 5 months ago

The Sox lineup will be fine, but the need to bat Crawford leadoff — at least at the outset. Crawford (L), Pedroia (R), Gonazales (L), Youkilis (R), Ortiz (L), Lowrie (S), Drew (L), Salty (S) and Ellsbury (L).

If the rumors are true and Gonzo bats 5th it’ll be the biggest lineup mistake I’ve ever seen.

start_wearing_purple
start_wearing_purple
4 years 5 months ago

The rumors I’ve hear have Ells batting first, Crawford batting third, and Gonzalez as clean up.

You're Killing Me Smalls
4 years 5 months ago

With Pedroia in the 5 spot, right?

Ells (L), Crawford (L), Gonzales (L), Youk (R), Pedroia (R), Ortiz (L), Scutaro (R), Drew (L), Salty (S)….. At least I think I saw a proposed lineup like this one….

start_wearing_purple
start_wearing_purple
4 years 5 months ago

… No, was that sarcasm?

Youk in the #5 spot. Pedy in the #2 spot.

You're Killing Me Smalls
4 years 5 months ago

No, just plain stupidity on my part…

But what about a 1-4 of Ells, Crawford, Pedroia, Gonzales? Do you think they would benefit with Ells and Crawford back to back?

MaineSox
4 years 5 months ago

I wish they’d let me make out the lineup card; Crawford would definitely be leading off and playing center field.

MB923
4 years 5 months ago

Why Crawford lead off? He has a pretty bad OBP (although it was good in 2010).

notsureifsrs
4 years 5 months ago

…and even better in 2009. so you’d have to go back 3 years to find a “pretty bad” OBP

MB923
4 years 5 months ago

Except he wasn’t batting lead off in either of those years also. His career OBP batting leadoff is only .323 and batting 2nd is .349. That is no coincidence. And his career OBP leading off an inning is .339. He doesn’t belong in the leadoff spot.

notsureifsrs
4 years 5 months ago

sigh. how much thought did you put into that? such a specious argument

first of all, he hasn’t hit 1st in the order in the past 2 years. so either way here, you’re reaching back at least three seasons for data

second of all, his slash line leading off an inning in 2010 was .283/.336/.475. in 2009, it was .289/.379/.433

“he doesn’t belong in the leadoff spot” is pure superstitious nonsense

MB923
4 years 5 months ago

“second of all, his slash line leading off an inning in 2010 was .283/.336/.475. in 2009, it was .289/.379/.433″ So it was Worse last year, cool.

“he doesn’t belong in the leadoff spot” is pure superstitious nonsense

O RLY? Then why aren’t the Red Sox leading him off? And why haven’t the Rays led him off in about 3 years?

Ellsbury is a better leadoff hitter than Crawford. I’ve already showed the stats that he’s better, now provide me some stats on why Crawford is a better leadoff hitter than Ellsbury.

notsureifsrs
4 years 5 months ago

this is why i don’t enjoy talking to you. you refuse to acknowledge the most basic things because you prioritize appearing to be right over actually being right

can you tell the class when the last time crawford hit leadoff regularly was? say, more than 20 games in a season?

notsureifsrs
4 years 5 months ago

ah nevermind i’ll just do it myself. it was 2005

that’s right. for your argument on why carl crawford is not a leadoff hitter in 2011, you are citing statistics from 2005 earlier. and copping an attitude about it

not only is that just ludicrous in general, but we know crawford’s bat (and OBP) didn’t emerge as a serious weapon until 2009. so even 2007-2008 numbers wouldn’t be very reliable, since he batted poorly from every spot in the lineup, not just leadoff (had he hit there – he didn’t)

so what we do is check the only reliable data we have: the past two years leading off innings (which is the same thing as hitting leadoff – especially given that the leadoff hitter isn’t guaranteed to leadoff an inning more than once per game)

i already have you those numbers. they are exactly what you’d expect from a hitter of his caliber, and do no suggest at all that he can’t hit well from the #1 spot

the end

MB923
4 years 5 months ago

Actually leading off to bat an inning (at least from the 2 spot) is not the same thing. Because you are facing a tiring starter or facing a new reliever. Completely different than leading off a game, but I choose to show it anyway in case you were interested.

MB923
4 years 5 months ago

Also please answer this question. Why is Ellsbury NOT a good leadoff hitter (or another way, what makes Crawford a better leadoff hitter than Ellsbury)?

notsureifsrs
4 years 5 months ago

an optimized lineup features a high OBP hitter in the leadoff spot. even if we dock crawford some OBP points for this urban legend that he’s not as good from there, he and ellsbury are about even in that category

so the biggest factor becomes which player do you want to get the most at-bats over the course of the season? whoever is the better hitter, clearly

crawford is a much better hitter than ellsbury. he posted a wOBA near .380 in 2010 and has averaged a wOBA of .370 over the past 2 seasons. at his peak in 2009 (pre-injury, mind you – he missed an entire season) ellsbury’s wOBA was just over .350. the year before it was just over .330. crawford is a much better hitter

except against lefties, where ellsbury’s platoon split is positive. so i move crawford back to 6th there, which is typically the optimal spot for a base-stealer

MB923
4 years 5 months ago

In 2005 he split time leading off and batting 2nd

Leading off, 78 games, .290/.325
Batting 2nd, 60 games, .329/.354

There, I’m comparing them now in the Same season.

MB923
4 years 5 months ago

Is it also “fair” to put up his stats with teh bases empty? In 2010, a .321 OBP. and a .273 BA. With men on base, .399 OBP, .350 BA.

Crawford is a much MUCH better hitter with runners on base. Most players are of course, but the splits for Crawford are ridiculous.

I don’t think putting him in the leadoff spot is a good move if he does better with men on base. Putting him in the 3 spot is perfect for him and the lineup overall since you don’t start off with lefty and lefty.

notsureifsrs
4 years 5 months ago

that’s a fair thing to check. the concern with a one year split however is that you’re dealing with a pretty small sample size, and discerning actual ability from standard variance is difficult. but if we found a similar number in 2009, that would encourage your conclusion

alas, he hit .313/.366/.472 with the bases empty in 2009. so it appears to be standard year-to-year variance

Ben_Cherington
4 years 5 months ago

Thank you…I was abou to find the stats! Crawford does not need to leadoff. He is not good at it, nor does he want too!

Also Crawford is not a Centerfielder! His stats arent good in center. Too many bad comments in here!

notsureifsrs
4 years 5 months ago

you didn’t find the stats

his leadoff stats are predictably fine and his centerfield stats (all 54 career games worth) are good too

Ben_Cherington
4 years 5 months ago

its bc MB923 posted the stats. Another point is, if he is such a good CF then why has he not stayed in CF? AND like MB also said, if he is so good at leading off, why isnt he doing that either? Leading off an inning and being a lead off hitter are different ya know?

notsureifsrs
4 years 5 months ago

because he told the team in tampa he didn’t want to do either one of those things

he has told anyone who’s asked he will happily hit anywhere in boston. no one has asked him to play centerfield, unfortunately

and no, hitting leadoff and leading off an inning are not very different at all. the biggest difference is that the leadoff hitter will get more ABs over the course of the season, which is what you want for a guy who posted a wOBA near .380

MB923
4 years 5 months ago

“and no, hitting leadoff and leading off an inning are not very different at all.”

Very different? No. Different? Yes. As I said there is a difference between facing a fresh starter, facing a tiring starter, and facing a new pitcher.

notsureifsrs
4 years 5 months ago

the difference is insignificant. he faces a fresh starter as #2 as well. and facing a new reliever would make leading off an inning the harder thing to do

there isn’t anything inherently more difficult about hitting #1. nothing to debate there. it was just a question of whether crawford for some reason had a mental block preventing him from performing there. there is no data to suggest such a thing. in fact the data suggests the opposite

Ben_Cherington
4 years 5 months ago

and he has also stated he does not want to be a leadoff hitter! so good point!

as far as leading off an inning and being a leadoff hitter…

Did you ever play baseball or are your just a numbers guy?

notsureifsrs
4 years 5 months ago

he stated that 5 years ago. this year he has stated that he’ll happily hit anywhere

i played baseball through college and hit leadoff about a third of the time. sowwy

Ben_Cherington
4 years 5 months ago

of course he will say that…Im not arguing he didnt, I know he did. But previously before signing with the red sox he stated he does not like to leadoff! Johnny Damon also wants to retire a red sox, then wants to retire a yankee, then wants to retire a tiger…see what im getting at here! Maybe CC is saying this bc he wants ppl to be happy with him at his new place.

Then as a leadoff you should know there is a difference btw a leadoff and leading off an inning

MaineSox
4 years 5 months ago

Crawford said he didn’t think he was good at leading off, that’s a lot different than saying he wouldn’t. He also said he wouldn’t play CF in Tampa specifically because they told him that he wasn’t any good at it and Rocco was going to play center.

Ben_Cherington
4 years 5 months ago

Well in all fairness its not that he is a bad CF or leadoff, he is just better in LF and 2 or 3 hole hitter

MaineSox
4 years 5 months ago

It’s hard to really say how good he would be at either one since he hasn’t done either more than a handful of times in several years, but his skills should play well in both cases.

Ben_Cherington
4 years 5 months ago

it appears we agree on your statement…Happy Days!!!

Even if they are small sample sizes, he does perform better in LF and not leading off

MaineSox
4 years 5 months ago

But the last (and only) time he spent any significant amount of time in CF was in 2004 so you’re comparing his time in CF in ’04 to his time in LF in ’10 (or ’09-’10) and he is a better hitter overall now than he was then. In ’04 he actually hit better as a CF than he did as a LF and while his UZR/150 was slightly lower in CF when you account for the positional adjustment he would very likely be more valuable as a CF even with slightly “worse” defense.

0bsessions
4 years 5 months ago

His OBP is trending upwards and he currently has better plate discipline than Ellsbury.

MB923
4 years 5 months ago

Crawford walks less than Ellsbury and strikes out more than Ellsbury. Crawford also swings at more pitches out of the zone than Ellsbury (30.6% to 25.4%)

As far as pitchers per at bat/plate appearnce I’m still trying to find that.

MB923
4 years 5 months ago

P/PA is even at 3.75 for each

MB923
4 years 5 months ago

Yes his OBP does trend upwards….From the 2 spot, not leadoff.

MB923
4 years 5 months ago

If you’re interested in mine

Righties

1- Ellsbury
2- Pedroia
3- Crawford
4- Youklilis
5- Gonzalez
6- Ortiz
7- Scutaro
8- Drew
9- Salt

Lefties

Top 5 stay the same

6- Scutaro/Lowrie
7- Drew
8- Cameron
9- Salt

notsureifsrs
4 years 5 months ago

dave cameron argued for this lineup

1. Drew
2. Youkilis
3. Ortiz
4. Gonzalez
5. Pedroia
6. Crawford
7. Scutaro
8. Ellsbury
9. Salty

i’d rather see this lineup

1. crawford
2. pedroia
3. gonzalez
4. youkilis
5. ortiz
6. scutaro/lowrie
7. drew
8. salty
9. ellsbury

and against lefties

1. ellsbury
2. pedroia
3. gonzalez
4. youkilis
5. cameron
6. crawford
7. scutaro/lowrie
8. drew
9. salty

dc21892
4 years 5 months ago

Crawford and Gonzo have decent splits against lefties so there is no need to split them up by two right handed hitters. Also, Tito likes to go with the LHH/RHH combo throughout the lineup. It will be as L/R as possible seeing there is more lefties than righties in the lineup.

notsureifsrs
4 years 5 months ago

crawford’s lefty splits are not good

dc21892
4 years 5 months ago

Who said good? I said they have “decent” splits against lefties. His are not stellar, they we can survive with him being next to Gonzo.

notsureifsrs
4 years 5 months ago

i have no way to measure whether they are “survivable”, but they definitely aren’t decent either

wOBA against lefties by year

2010 – .306

2009 – .313

2008 – .289

career – .307

MB923
4 years 5 months ago

Your lineup (while I disagree with a couple of spots) makes MUCH more sense than Dave’s. JD Drew batting leadoff “is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard”.

0bsessions
4 years 5 months ago

Historically speaking, Drew has always been a guy who has a high OBP and, while not a base stealing threat, was always quick enough to not clog the bases and make a first to third move.

Considering his diminishing skills with his aging, I wouldn’t plug him in the leadoff anymore, but I used to be a big advocate of Drew out of the leadoff spot.

dc21892
4 years 5 months ago

How’s Drew batting leadoff insanely idiotic? He gets on base A LOT with his ability to draw walks. He has batted leadoff for us for stretches of time, also.

MB923
4 years 5 months ago

It’s insanely idiotic to bat Drew leadoff with the current lineup they have is what I’m saying.

“He gets on base A LOT with his ability to draw walks”. So does Albert Pujols, your point?

And to go with a batter who doesn’t get IBB’d, Daric Barton led the AL in walks last year (Just IBB 2 times) and had a high OBP, he didn’t bad leadoff either, he batted 2nd.

MB923
4 years 5 months ago

In your lefties lineup, who is the DH? Cameron?

notsureifsrs
4 years 5 months ago

probably drew, actually, since he’s the fragile one

0bsessions
4 years 5 months ago

For lefties, I’m more partial to switching out Drew entirely for Cameron, starting Lowrie at third and putting Youk at DH. I’m a big defender of Drew, but he’s a guy who I’d just as soon straight up platoon at this point in his career.

Additionally, I’d throw Varitek out there instead of Salty since Varitek still hits lefties pretty well.

notsureifsrs
4 years 5 months ago

drew’s wOBA against lefties by season

2008 – .402

2009 – .382

2010 – .280

career – .340

but i can see the merits of giving drew extra risk and lowrie the extra ABs. and i like lowrie, so i’d be game for that

0bsessions
4 years 5 months ago

I assume you mean extra rest, correct?

Lunchbox45
4 years 5 months ago

I don’t like Dave’s line up one bit.

I like the different lead off batters vs diff starters.. not sure why more teams don’t do it

notsureifsrs
4 years 5 months ago

player egos

Lunchbox45
4 years 5 months ago

They’ll be sorry when they’re all replaced by robots.

notsureifsrs
4 years 5 months ago

robots are so scrappy!

MB923
4 years 5 months ago

Haha and then no more home plate umpires after!

MB923
4 years 5 months ago

Agree.

MaineSox
4 years 5 months ago

If it weren’t for the number of really good hitter we have I wouldn’t be against Drew leading off. The only reason I don’t like that lineup is because it is going to take at-bats away from someone else who I would rather have more than Drew. But as far as optimized lineups go that one isn’t bad, Drew is probably the second best OBP guy on our team behind Youkilis.

MB923
4 years 5 months ago

“If it weren’t for the number of really good hitter we have I wouldn’t be against Drew leading off.”

Your first sentence says it all. That’s why I bought it up that batting Drew lead-off, with all due respect to Dave, is very stupid.

MaineSox
4 years 5 months ago

Yeah, I was agreeing that he shouldn’t; but it’s not because he wouldn’t be a good fit there, simply because there are guys I would rather get the at-bats.

MB923
4 years 5 months ago

I don’t think there would be anything wrong with that. Although if they want to do lefty/righty, Youlk could bat cleanup and Gonzalez could bat 5th

dc21892
4 years 5 months ago

Wow, Stanton and Bay? That would have been nice.

0bsessions
4 years 5 months ago

Heck, I’d have taken just Stanton.

dc21892
4 years 5 months ago

Same, and with so much potential you can see why FLA didn’t want to part ways.

iheartyourfart
4 years 5 months ago

Lars Andersen doesn’t have any trade value. Omar Minaya is out of a job, and Lars would have to continue not-producing well into his 30s before Sabean is interested.

woadude
4 years 5 months ago

Exactly, but honestly I hope he sticks around just to include him and his good buddy Michael Bowden in trade rumors.

woadude
4 years 5 months ago

I don’t think that article was accurate, it was not for Stanton AND Bay, it was a deal with the Marlins, Red Sox and Dodgers, and when the Red Sox couldn’t get Stanton they included Pitt and got Bay, the Marlins didn’t like the prospects coming their way to part with Stanton because Ramirez was going to LA and they weren’t going to accept what Pitt accepted for Bay and in hind sight they look very smart.

0bsessions
4 years 5 months ago

If I was the Marlins, I wouldn’t have touched that deal with a ten foot pole, either, to be honest with you. I still don’t comprehend how that deal got made. Everyone knew the Sox were desperate to get rid of Manny and getting Bay for him and only having to part with two pieces of AAAA filler to get him for a year and a half still shocks me.

woadude
4 years 5 months ago

The main point was there wasn’t a deal in place for Boston to get both, it was Stanton, nixed and then they got Bay.

MaineSox
4 years 5 months ago

It doesn’t say that there was a deal in place it says that they pursued a deal, and they did. They were trying to get a three-way deal done with the Marlins and Pirates, that would have brought Bay to Boston as well as some prospects from Florida and one of the prospects they wanted was Stanton. When the Marlins wouldn’t include Stanton the deal fell apart and the Dodger got involved.

Stanton was never close to coming to Boston because the Marlins had no interest in letting him go, but the Sox did “pursue” a deal for both Bay and Stanton just like the article says.

woadude
4 years 5 months ago

NO….It clearly states they had a deal that would of had both Stanton and Bay, this is why I am calling BS, it was one or the other and the Marlin deal had no wings.

MaineSox
4 years 5 months ago

But they DID try to get both of them, they were trying to get a deal done for Bay and prospects from the Marlins (namely Stanton). If you read the article and the article from ’08 that it links to you would see what the proposed deal actually was. The deal never happened because the Marlins didn’t want to let Stanton go, but they did try to get one done.

dc21892
4 years 5 months ago

Some better grammer would have made that easier to read. That was one big sentence with a bunch of commas thrown in. Not being an @$$, but I couldn’t really follow it.

0bsessions
4 years 5 months ago

“Some better grammer would have made that easier to read.”

“some better grammer”

“better grammer”

“grammEr”

dc21892
4 years 5 months ago

Yes, that’s what I said. I didn’t say anything about spelling. I mispelled a word that can still be made out for what it is. He had a huge run on sentence that he wanted people to read. Big difference.

0bsessions
4 years 5 months ago

Not really, it’s nitpicking either way. If you had any trouble determining what his point was, that’s a failing of your own comprehension. Yes, he had too many commas, but it’s really no more an affront to the English language than someone nitpicking peoples’ grammar while not checking their own spelling first.

As someone who’s been using chat rooms and forums since about twelve or thirteen, I’ve seen much worse than woahdude’s post and figured it out. What DOES irk me to no end is people insulting someone’s grammar and spelling the key word wrong. Monumental pet peeve of mine.

dc21892
4 years 5 months ago

Okay, relax. I was simplying saying he should do better with his grammar. I could make it out, but that’s not the point. It was a pain to read. My grammar isn’t 100% or my spelling, but I consider a run on paragraph like that very ridiculous.

woadude
4 years 5 months ago

How was that a pain to read? You know what a pain for me to read is? a response that has nothing to do with my post. They said the Sox were going to get BOTH and i called BS.

woadude
4 years 5 months ago

My grammar was fine, I had to use commas as to sperate things, you know a pause in a sentence, way to play dude, way to play.

dc21892
4 years 5 months ago

You can’t stunt Lavarnway and Andersons growth by splitting DH time. That would be foolish.

notsureifsrs
4 years 5 months ago

a 1B prospect without power just isn’t a hot commodity

notsureifsrs
4 years 5 months ago

youkilis slugged .592 in 2005 before he was called up

i didn’t say i’d given up on anderson; i said 1B prospects without power aren’t hot commodities. if/when he shows power, his stock will increase quickly

notsureifsrs
4 years 5 months ago

hard to get better at hitting without getting regular at-bats

MB923
4 years 5 months ago

I think you mean someone knows the difference between a good lineup and a bad lineup.

Lunchbox45
4 years 5 months ago

unless its Oakland

MaineSox
4 years 5 months ago

Not to mention getting better at catching (Lavarnway) without catching regularly.

notsureifsrs
4 years 5 months ago

youkilis was a 3rd basemen, so the comparison doesn’t even work in the first place. power is not nearly important at third as it is at first

again, you seem to be arguing with me as if i said anderson cannot/will not develop power. he might. all i said was that 1B prospects without it aren’t hot commodities. and anderson doesn’t have any yet