Oil Can Boyd Posted January 5, 2007 Share Posted January 5, 2007 And Mark Loretta signs with the Astros.I don't get why the (Red) Sox didn't even try to re-sign him. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Lammycat Posted January 5, 2007 Share Posted January 5, 2007 And Mark Loretta signs with the Astros.I don't get why the (Red) Sox didn't even try to re-sign him.Loretta really stunk it up last year, particularly in the last half of the season, and particularly away from Fenway. Plus, he doesn't have a place on the team besides a back up at first or second (where the back up slots are pretty well taken care of, anyway), as Dustin Pedroia will be given the chance to start at second. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Lammycat Posted January 5, 2007 Share Posted January 5, 2007 Oil Can, I just caught this on-line chat that the esteemed Pete Gammons did this afternoon on boston.com. I'll post the transcript that addresses your concern about why the Sox may not have offered Loretta an offer, and the rest of the transcript as a link: varitekmvp33 Hey Peter, glad to hear you and see you again, you mean alot to alot of people. Life long Red Sox fan in Oregon. Do you think the Sox are really going to go into the season with Pedroia at second base or is there still a chance they come to their senses and re-sign Mark Loretta. He has not signed with anyone yet, it almost seems like he is waiting for the Sox to do something? Peter_Gammons I don't think there's any question about Pedroia playing second. You'll see him in far better condition this year than last. He has the best hands of any middle infielder they've had in recent memory and while he doesn't run well, they think his range will be far superior to Loretta. Given what could be a need for a backup first baseman and third baseman, there's always a possibility that Loretta could come back if he continues to get no other offers. http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/reds...hat_transcript/ Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted January 5, 2007 Share Posted January 5, 2007 I'm quite glad the Marlins took Hanley and not Pedroia. I heard the had their choice of either, and after putting up one of the best rookie years in the last decade, I'd say we made the right choice. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Duck-Billed Catechist Posted January 5, 2007 Share Posted January 5, 2007 What's interesting about second basemen is, offensively speaking, most of them are interchangeable. There are a few elites that bat +.800 OPS. Past that, among qualifying players, there is not much difference between Brian Roberts (#9 at .757 last year) and Mark Loretta (#22 at .706). Essentially, year to year variations can thrust them from near the bottom of the pile to near the top--Loretta was at the very top in 2004. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Oil Can Boyd Posted January 5, 2007 Share Posted January 5, 2007 Oil Can, I just caught this on-line chat that the esteemed Pete Gammons did this afternoon on boston.com. I'll post the transcript that addresses your concern about why the Sox may not have offered Loretta an offer, and the rest of the transcript as a link: varitekmvp33 Hey Peter, glad to hear you and see you again, you mean alot to alot of people. Life long Red Sox fan in Oregon. Do you think the Sox are really going to go into the season with Pedroia at second base or is there still a chance they come to their senses and re-sign Mark Loretta. He has not signed with anyone yet, it almost seems like he is waiting for the Sox to do something? Peter_Gammons I don't think there's any question about Pedroia playing second. You'll see him in far better condition this year than last. He has the best hands of any middle infielder they've had in recent memory and while he doesn't run well, they think his range will be far superior to Loretta. Given what could be a need for a backup first baseman and third baseman, there's always a possibility that Loretta could come back if he continues to get no other offers. http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/reds...hat_transcript/ Thanks for posting that. I am sure Gammons knows better than I do, but I was not all that impressed with Pedroia last year either in the field or at the plate. And maybe I hold Loretta in high regard after watching him hit a walk-off homerun last Patriot's Day. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted January 5, 2007 Share Posted January 5, 2007 What's interesting about second basemen is, offensively speaking, most of them are interchangeable. There are a few elites that bat +.800 OPS. Past that, among qualifying players, there is not much difference between Brian Roberts (#9 at .757 last year) and Mark Loretta (#22 at .706). Essentially, year to year variations can thrust them from near the bottom of the pile to near the top--Loretta was at the very top in 2004. Most elite 2nd basemen get most of their value from defense. And it was much the same for Shortstops until the last 2 decades or so. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Lammycat Posted January 6, 2007 Share Posted January 6, 2007 The Yankees picked up Doug Mientkiewicz today, vastly improving their defense at 1st base. With Giambi most likely becoming the full-time DH, looks like Bernie Williams will be headed for retirement. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Duck-Billed Catechist Posted January 6, 2007 Share Posted January 6, 2007 If Doug Mientkiewicz can keep landing starting/platoon jobs then Ross Gload deserves one somewhere. I'm not sure if that's what the Royals have planned for him. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted January 6, 2007 Share Posted January 6, 2007 I finally read Moneyball this week. Very interesting book, and makes you think about things in a different way. And I'm looking at Miguel Cabrera's stats and I have to say if the Marlins don't sign him long term, I'm probably going to have to find a new team to root for. He is so good, it's retarded. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MrRain422 Posted January 6, 2007 Author Share Posted January 6, 2007 I finally read Moneyball this week. Very interesting book, and makes you think about things in a different way. WTF took you so long? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MrRain422 Posted January 6, 2007 Author Share Posted January 6, 2007 I mean, its only the most important book regarding baseball since Ball Four. What the hell were you waiting for? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted January 6, 2007 Share Posted January 6, 2007 I never got around to buying it. Until last week. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
tongue-tied lightning Posted January 9, 2007 Share Posted January 9, 2007 god, I hope McGwire doesn't get in Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Oil Can Boyd Posted January 9, 2007 Share Posted January 9, 2007 god, I hope McGwire doesn't get in Orioles shortstop Cal Ripken (98.5 percent of the vote) and Padres outfielder Tony Gwynn have been elected into the Baseball Hall of Fame, it was announced today. Controversial Cardinals slugger Mark McGwire and Red Sox great Jim Rice each fell short. Rice received 63.5 percent of the vote (75 percent is needed for induction). Quote Link to post Share on other sites
IATTBYB Posted January 9, 2007 Share Posted January 9, 2007 McGwire was included on less than 25% of the ballots, well short of the 75% needed. ESPN.com news services NEW YORK -- Mark McGwire fell far short in his first try for the Hall of Fame, picked by 23.5 percent of voters while Tony Gwynn and Cal Ripken Jr. easily gained baseball's highest honor. Tarnished by accusations of steroid use, McGwire appeared on 128 of a record 545 ballots in voting released Tuesday by the Baseball Writers' Association of America. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
cryptique Posted January 9, 2007 Share Posted January 9, 2007 Rice received 63.5 percent of the vote (75 percent is needed for induction). Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Duck-Billed Catechist Posted January 9, 2007 Share Posted January 9, 2007 Things I learned from VC baseball threads: Jim Rice should be in the HOF, but not Jeff Bagwell. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
parisisstale Posted January 9, 2007 Share Posted January 9, 2007 It continues to be a joke that Rice isn't in. Gossage fell 21 votes short. Take away the streak, who thinks Ripken was a GREAT player? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
cryptique Posted January 9, 2007 Share Posted January 9, 2007 Bagwell must first endure a few years' penance for his long history of criminal beard grooming. Then he'll get his shot. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Duck-Billed Catechist Posted January 9, 2007 Share Posted January 9, 2007 Well, he's not eligible yet. But the consensus in here seemed to be that he doesn't deserve to get in. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Lammycat Posted January 9, 2007 Share Posted January 9, 2007 It continues to be a joke that Rice isn't in. Gossage fell 21 votes short.I agree, and I also think Gossage deserves a place in the Hall. I realize that no inductee has ever received 100% of the first-ballot vote, including Ruth, Mays, Cobb, etc., but who are these clowns who feel they're unworthy? Look at Cal Ripken (and Gwynn, for this matter): if you really need to question yourself whether or not the man belongs in the HOF, you shouldn't be allowed the privelage of voting. Christ, Dante Bichette received 3 votes?! Bret Saberhaggen?! Ken Caminitti receives a couple of votes?!! Yeesh, something's not right with this picture. Here's a cute take on it from a HOF voter from Chicago who explains why, even though he doesn't suspect Gwynn or Ripken personally used steroids, he refuses to vote for ANY player from the '93-01 era. He submitted a blank ballot: http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/basebal...mostemailedlink Quote Link to post Share on other sites
tongue-tied lightning Posted January 9, 2007 Share Posted January 9, 2007 keeping Rice out is a complete joke, that makes the HOF look silly. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/base...ex.html?cnn=yes Quote Link to post Share on other sites
quarter23cd Posted January 9, 2007 Share Posted January 9, 2007 Take away the streak, who thinks Ripken was a GREAT player?I do, but I'm probably biased, what with that whole childhood-idol thing. Having watched him closely his whole career, I can tell you that he was indeed a tremendous player. Did he blow up the scoreboard every night? Not by today's roid-fiesta standards, but neither did Gwynn, really. (who, by the way, I can't think of a better player to accompany Cal into the hall) To a fan watching him day in and day out, the streak was nice, but it has been overstated in its importance. Sure, the "ambassador to the game" factor got him quite a few extra votes for a first-balloter, but I don't think there is any question he belongs. Anyway, Cheers, Cal and Tony. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Lammycat Posted January 9, 2007 Share Posted January 9, 2007 Ripken was a great player, certainly among the best to ever play shortstop. An all-star 19 times, (I believe), out of 21 years, a few gold gloves, and really, a pioneer in the power-hitting shortstop we've come to know, as we was a relatively big guy for the position in the early 80s. A big guy with amazing range was pretty new. I think Ripken gets pigeonholed sometimes due to "the streak" (which is secondary to his abilities on the field) and because he was low-key on and off the field. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.