Locomotion69 Posted July 16, 2011 Share #601 Posted July 16, 2011 If Posada retires after this year, the Yankees could also rotate Martin and Cervelli, having Martin at DH and Cervelli catching. Also, resigning Jose Molina in the offseason is a possibility as well. If I'm not mistaken, Molina is a free agent after the season Martin is hitting just .222 and in the American League playing for the Yankees. He has some power but you have to admit he hasn't lived up to his expectations so far offensively. Cervellis catching mitt has more holes then a slice of swiss cheese, he is awful defensively with no power and is just a singles hitter, he also has arrogant to boot. Everybody runs on him, lol. There is even a facebook page called "Cervilli is garbage" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted July 16, 2011 Share #602 Posted July 16, 2011 Martin > Cervelli... offensively & defensively.... I don't see an upside to Cervelli, there's no progression in his game at all... you can't build a career just based off getting lucky hits here & there..... likable guy personality-wise, but when it comes down to production, Cervelli aint cuttin it.... I don't know about this Monteiro kid they got coming up, but I think the Yankees are just fine with Martin; even though he's cooled off (offensively) since season's beginning.... The Yankees need SP more than they need a bat... Not that they have to go out & get someone RIGHT NOW b/c the situation is not that dire (yet)..... Ubaldo is a good pitcher, but there's somethin about him I do not care for.... AJ's gonna have to be the guy to step it up the rest of this year - no excuses... and as was said, colon & garcia were temporary/plug-in's, so to speak, and you can't expect much out of Hughes right now coming off his stint on the DL..... As far as defensively, the OF has been outstanding.... outside of tex & cano, I cannot say the same for the IF.... like I stated in the chatbox, I'm more worried about that than I am SP right now.... they gotta get their focus back on track... have em watch a couple Tom Emanski defensive drills tapes if need be... lol If y'all are talkin about the distant future.... well again, like I told shortline in that same chat session, we have to wait to see who's gonna be out there/available.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YankeesPwnMets Posted July 16, 2011 Share #603 Posted July 16, 2011 Tex isn't hitting for average. He is hitting for power now, and I think he should try to balance both. I don't even think the Yankees have a .300 hitter now, which I consider pathetic. We need to start getting hitters to raise the average. The Yanks, even though they are a power team, can't rely on the home run that much Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shortline Bus Posted July 17, 2011 Share #604 Posted July 17, 2011 Sweet! :tup:After losing '2' straight to the Jays, bombers come back and when last two of the 4-game post ASG series. Phil Hughes coming back from the DL looked very good as Bombers won 7-2.B) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted July 17, 2011 Share #605 Posted July 17, 2011 like I said, no need to hit the panic button... I never worry about the Yankees, offensively..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shortline Bus Posted July 17, 2011 Share #606 Posted July 17, 2011 like I said, no need to hit the panic button... I never worry about the Yankees, offensively..... True. While i am not Forest Glen(what happened to him about the Jeter 3,000 hit thing lol?B))when you get your butts kicked in 2 blowouts it does highlight the Yankees real need for at least 1 more good starter i.e #2 or #3 type sp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grand Concourse Posted July 17, 2011 Share #607 Posted July 17, 2011 Colon's 'magic' is gone, so time to ship him down and bring up Nova. Garcia, well his decline is more gradual, but he'd be at best with Mitre in the mop up role. We don't need to bring him up. He's always going to hate on Jeter no matter what. Nothing will change his opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7LineFan Posted July 18, 2011 Share #608 Posted July 18, 2011 Colon's 'magic' is gone, so time to ship him down and bring up Nova Can't. Veteran's consent rule, plus he's been long out of options. I say give him a couple more chances. If he can't work his way back to first half form, shunt him back to the pen -- the job he was originally signed for -- and bring up Nova. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shortline Bus Posted July 19, 2011 Share #609 Posted July 19, 2011 Can't. Veteran's consent rule, plus he's been long out of options. I say give him a couple more chances. If he can't work his way back to first half form, shunt him back to the pen -- the job he was originally signed for -- and bring up Nova. That MLB vet's rule of a player right to vetoing any chance of being shipped to the minors (other than for rehab work from injuries) should be changed IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7LineFan Posted July 19, 2011 Share #610 Posted July 19, 2011 That MLB vet's rule of a player right to vetoing any chance of being shipped to the minors (other than for rehab work from injuries) should be changed IMO. Why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shortline Bus Posted July 19, 2011 Share #611 Posted July 19, 2011 Why? Because for instance a player who maybe at the end of his carrer and is awful i.e batting avg. of under .200 or has an 8.00 era he is taking the spot for maybe a young minor league prospect. In other words I feel that a vet should only be allowed one time in his career, the option to veto being shipped to the minors. That of course he played 5 years in majors. It's not the same as the reserve clause(I saw the recent Curt Flood special on HBO) that did not allow free agency until around 1975. However pro sports is a results oriented business. Thus that the reason i want to see the waiver rule for Vets being allowed to send back to the minors be once in a career. And even if he is demoted he must be still paid his full gurantee contract for that season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Locomotion69 Posted July 19, 2011 Share #612 Posted July 19, 2011 Thanks Jason Bay for killing the rally, you are BRUTAL! Swinging at the first pitch to boot, I will be thinking of you when the Mets secure last place!:mad: Jason Bay was the last signing from Minaya right? unreal....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grand Concourse Posted July 19, 2011 Share #613 Posted July 19, 2011 lol, he can help beat the Yankees, but otherwise kills the team... something we share in common- our hate for him. as of this post Yankees finally tie the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7LineFan Posted July 19, 2011 Share #614 Posted July 19, 2011 Because for instance a player who maybe at the end of his carrer and is awful i.e batting avg. of under .200 or has an 8.00 era he is taking the spot for maybe a young minor league prospect. In other words I feel that a vet should only be allowed one time in his career, the option to veto being shipped to the minors. That of course he played 5 years in majors. It's not the same as the reserve clause(I saw the recent Curt Flood special on HBO) that did not allow free agency until around 1975. However pro sports is a results oriented business. Thus that the reason i want to see the waiver rule for Vets being allowed to send back to the minors be once in a career. And even if he is demoted he must be still paid his full gurantee contract for that season. This is what designating a player for assignment is for. Besides, if he's in the middle of a contract and you ship him to the minors, then what about the rest of the contract? You're not going to pay him for just the one season. You're paying the entire thing. Your suggestion takes away the rights of a player with substantial service time in the major leagues to play in the major leagues. It would allow teams to stash veterans away in their farm systems where no one else could get to them, when another team could better use them. Not fair to the players, and not fair to the other teams in the league. Players would rather play for a different major league team than be called up for ten years then be sent down for the rest of his career. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shortline Bus Posted July 19, 2011 Share #615 Posted July 19, 2011 This is what designating a player for assignment is for. Besides, if he's in the middle of a contract and you ship him to the minors, then what about the rest of the contract? You're not going to pay him for just the one season. You're paying the entire thing. Your suggestion takes away the rights of a player with substantial service time in the major leagues to play in the major leagues. It would allow teams to stash veterans away in their farm systems where no one else could get to them, when another team could better use them. Not fair to the players, and not fair to the other teams in the league. Players would rather play for a different major league team than be called up for ten years then be sent down for the rest of his career. Good point 7line. However maybe some sort of way for older or aging players who should go to minors should still be looked at after the mess in 2011 when the Mets tried to send down Ollie Perez who was stinking up the joint and he refused. Thus why i made this suggestion. And back to on the field action. Yanks came back last nite (monday nite 7/18/11 game)and won vs the Rays in Tampa. Game was delayed due to a short term power failure at the Trop. The Rays need a new stadium asap preferably in City of Tampa not in current suburan St. Petersburg, Fla. If not then consider moving to say nearby Orlando who be trying for years to get a MLB team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7LineFan Posted July 19, 2011 Share #616 Posted July 19, 2011 Good point 7line. However maybe some sort of way for older or aging players who should go to minors should still be looked at after the mess in 2011 when the Mets tried to send down Ollie Perez who was stinking up the joint and he refused. Thus why i made this suggestion. If they really wanted to get rid of him they would have just DFA'd him right away, and then granted his release since he would refuse the assignment. Didn't the Rays have plans for a new stadium just a few years ago? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shortline Bus Posted July 19, 2011 Share #617 Posted July 19, 2011 If they really wanted to get rid of him they would have just DFA'd him right away, and then granted his release since he would refuse the assignment. Didn't the Rays have plans for a new stadium just a few years ago? Yup. However it was 'scrapped' due to the ongoing recession. The Rays Owner says at least for next couple of years he stay at their current home the "trop' in St. Pete. However within 5 years he also stated that if the team did not have a new stadium or are in process of buliding one (he prefered it in City of Tampa) one he then would consider leaving Tampa region totally. And 7line you aware the Marlins move into a new stadium next year right? The Fish new stadium will be at the old Orange Bowl Football stadium. That was the oringal home of the NFL Dolphins located near Downtown Miami in that area "Little Havana' neighborhood! The Marlins will be renamed the "Miami Marlins' as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grand Concourse Posted July 19, 2011 Share #618 Posted July 19, 2011 I just wonder if there's going to be any word on a possible contraction. I still think that's what the game really needs. The A's* and rays are among the only 2 teams that are in need of a new ballpark. this would be a good time to contract them before they get a new stadium. In a 'reverse draft' teams at the bottom [based on the total record of the past 10 years rather than just the previous season, to make it more fair] would be first to select the best players [that they can afford]. *I would still move the brand to DC and replace the Nationals [ie: the current team will become the new A's]. You can't just get rid of the A's with the history that they have. The 'Expos', victim of the 94 strike, have no history and no one would care if they were gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SI Subway Posted July 19, 2011 Share #619 Posted July 19, 2011 I just wonder if there's going to be any word on a possible contraction. I still think that's what the game really needs. The A's* and rays are among the only 2 teams that are in need of a new ballpark. this would be a good time to contract them before they get a new stadium. In a 'reverse draft' teams at the bottom [based on the total record of the past 10 years rather than just the previous season, to make it more fair] would be first to select the best players [that they can afford]. *I would still move the brand to DC and replace the Nationals [ie: the current team will become the new A's]. You can't just get rid of the A's with the history that they have. The 'Expos', victim of the 94 strike, have no history and no one would care if they were gone. Why, exactly, does Tampa need a new ballpark? Come on, it's only 21 years old! Dodger Stadium is 49 and Fenway Park (which is applying for a "national landmark" status) is going on 100! Besides, I have been there and I love that stadium. It's not the cookie cutter that you would expect from a domed stadium, and the concessions and seats are wonderful. But I digress... If the league were to contract, I would get rid of the Nats and the *drumroll* Angels! Do we really need three major league teams in southern California? They attract fans away from each other, especially between the two LA teams. Additionally, I would move the A's to DC, as you said, and have them play at Nationals Stadium (which would be renamed by then, of course.). Why waste a perfectly good and beautiful stadium due to a contraction? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shortline Bus Posted July 19, 2011 Share #620 Posted July 19, 2011 Say what? Angels stadium or w/e it's called now was totally rebulit only about 10-15 years ago. The "A" aka the ballpark at Disneyland went from a multi-purpose cookie cutter '70's era stadium(the NFL Rams also played there for years until 1995 when they moved to St. Louis)to a nice baseball only ballpark. With the Dodgers problems and the Angels making the playoffs *almost every year for a decade now, they are almost as popular in Southern Calif. as the Dodgers. News flash SI subway Frank McCourt's screwup managing the team has brought the Dodgers to all time lows in popularity and attendence in LA since he became owner. Since LA does not have a NFL club right now, the region's most popular club right now is the LA Lakers. McCourt also being cheap & pocketing most of the Dodgers profits tragically played a roled in the Byran Stowe beating. LA (unlike in the NBA) can support '2' MLB teams if both teams are playing well. Just as recently in 2009 when both teams made the LCS, both LA area clubs drew a combined 5 Million tickets sold. And the Padres are not leaving SD for a long while or else MLB would have to pay at $500 Million to leave their home at Patco. Padres and MLB have at least a 30-40 year lease agreement to stay in San Diego (since ballpark opened almost a decade ago)so they can't until at least around year 2030 at the earliest. I only agree SI subway on the A's leaving the Bay area if a new ballpark in either Oakland or down the coast in a growing city San Jose can't be bulit soon. And on the topic on the Rays. While I never been to the "Trop' it might be only 20 years old but it's a 'dump' to me. Not to mention correct me if wrong but I believe has several minor safety codes violations over the years have also occured at the Trop. While not as bad, as the former Montreal Olympic Stadium was in it's last few years, it not that attracttive IMO. There a reason, even with being a playoff contender for last 4 seasons or so, the Rays are still in bottom half of tickets sales in all of MLB, playing at the Trop. And don't dare compare the 'Trop' to landmark and much more attractive parks like Fenway, Wrigley and Dodger Stadium. I thought SI Subway you were smarter than that. I have visited Tampa a couple of times (got cousins down there) and almost all of the sports columnists and sports talk show hosts down all say the same thing. In the next 5 years the Rays must get a new retractable dome (similar to the new one in Miami)ballpark preferably in or close to Downtown Tampa. While SIsubway it's your choice to say the Trop is 'not terrible' and even like it, to compare it to Dodger Stadium, Fenway or Wrigley is kind of a slap in face lol to those landmark stadiums.:confused: Just my takes.:eek: Why, exactly, does Tampa need a new ballpark? Come on, it's only 21 years old! Dodger Stadium is 49 and Fenway Park (which is applying for a "national landmark" status) is going on 100! Besides, I have been there and I love that stadium. It's not the cookie cutter that you would expect from a domed stadium, and the concessions and seats are wonderful. But I digress... If the league were to contract, I would get rid of the Nats and the *drumroll* Angels! Do we really need three major league teams in southern California? They attract fans away from each other, especially between the two LA teams. Additionally, I would move the A's to DC, as you said, and have them play at Nationals Stadium (which would be renamed by then, of course.). Why waste a perfectly good and beautiful stadium due to a contraction? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7LineFan Posted July 19, 2011 Share #621 Posted July 19, 2011 If the league were to contract, I would get rid of the Nats and the *drumroll* Angels! Do we really need three major league teams in southern California? They attract fans away from each other, especially between the two LA teams. Additionally, I would move the A's to DC, as you said, and have them play at Nationals Stadium (which would be renamed by then, of course.). Why waste a perfectly good and beautiful stadium due to a contraction? So you're gonna get rid of the Angels... even though they've been doing very well for x number of years. There is a healthy competition between the Dodgers and the Angels -- they even said so during their Sunday night game a few weeks back. Why would you contract a franchise that makes money and is doing well? You can't just choose teams based solely on proximity. And I agree with Shortline on this -- you do NOT compare the Trop to Dodger Stadium or Fenway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shortline Bus Posted July 19, 2011 Share #622 Posted July 19, 2011 So you're gonna get rid of the Angels... even though they've been doing very well for x number of years. There is a healthy competition between the Dodgers and the Angels -- they even said so during their Sunday night game a few weeks back. Why would you contract a franchise that makes money and is doing well? You can't just choose teams based solely on proximity. And I agree with Shortline on this -- you do NOT compare the Trop to Dodger Stadium or Fenway. Thanks (7)line fan.:tup: I know what about to say will never happen and sound nuts but i say it anyhow. Of the '4' cities/regions that have '2' MLB clubs in same market, i.e NY, LA/Orange County, SF Bay area and Chicago, if needed other than the A's maybe from Oakland, i would move the White Sox. Again it wont happen for a long while if ever and a man currently holding a job at 1600 Penn Ave is a big White Sox fan. Thus someone like Mr. Obama or someone named Micheal Jordan would in no time IMO led an ownership group to buy the Chisox. With that said, the White Sox will always be 2nd class citizens in Chicago to the Cubs. I am not saying it would happen but if SIsubway suggest that instead (moving the White Sox out of Chicago) that at least make more sense. Moving the Angels out of LA/Anaheim is flat out out of the question.:eek: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7LineFan Posted July 19, 2011 Share #623 Posted July 19, 2011 Remember how the Cubs came to town to play two games against the Yankees when the new Yankee Stadium opened in '09? ...no? Well, the Yankees will be traveling (eh... they'll be in Florida anyway lol) to Miami next year to help the Marlins open up their new stadium. Two exhibition games right at the end of Spring Training. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SI Subway Posted July 19, 2011 Share #624 Posted July 19, 2011 So you're gonna get rid of the Angels... even though they've been doing very well for x number of years. There is a healthy competition between the Dodgers and the Angels -- they even said so during their Sunday night game a few weeks back. Why would you contract a franchise that makes money and is doing well? You can't just choose teams based solely on proximity. And I agree with Shortline on this -- you do NOT compare the Trop to Dodger Stadium or Fenway. It wasn't based solely on proximity. Think about this: The Angels are gone, or turned into a AAA team. Attendence increases for the Dodgers and the Padres as a result. Dodgers and Padres start filling out stadium for once. As Shortline said, due to the lack of football, LA citizens have no one to turn to but baseball. Take out one option, you benefit the other two. The Cubs and the White Sox have a healthy rivalry, but Shortline wants to take them out. The Sox have decades, no, a century of history, what have the Angels done other than a few playoff appearances and an artificial fan base? Nada. Thanks (7)line fan.:tup: I know what about to say will never happen and sound nuts but i say it anyhow. Of the '4' cities/regions that have '2' MLB clubs in same market, i.e NY, LA/Orange County, SF Bay area and Chicago, if needed other than the A's maybe from Oakland, i would move the White Sox. Again it wont happen for a long while if ever and a man currently holding a job at 1600 Penn Ave is a big White Sox fan. Thus someone like Mr. Obama or someone named Micheal Jordan would in no time IMO led an ownership group to buy the Chisox. With that said, the White Sox will always be 2nd class citizens in Chicago to the Cubs. I am not saying it would happen but if SIsubway suggest that instead (moving the White Sox out of Chicago) that at least make more sense. Moving the Angels out of LA/Anaheim is flat out out of the question.:eek: As I said before, moving the White Sox would be ludicrous. The Sox have a century of history since their inception. There is no way that they will ever be contracted, Obama completely aside. What will you say to the die-hard White Sox fans when they leave? It's not happening in our lifetimes, if ever. Ther at least is some respect for rival teams in LA, and Angel fans would happily go over to the Padres or Dodgers. Eliminating the Angels makes waaay more sense than eliminating the White Sox or Rays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YankeesPwnMets Posted July 19, 2011 Share #625 Posted July 19, 2011 Remember how the Cubs came to town to play two games against the Yankees when the new Yankee Stadium opened in '09? ...no? Well, the Yankees will be traveling (eh... they'll be in Florida anyway lol) to Miami next year to help the Marlins open up their new stadium. Two exhibition games right at the end of Spring Training. Interesting. Can't wait to see it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.