10-05-2010, 09:15 PM
<!--quoteo(post=116295:date=Oct 5 2010, 09:01 PM:name=Giff)-->QUOTE (Giff @ Oct 5 2010, 09:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <!--quotec-->de·mote (d-mt)
tr.v. de·mot·ed, de·mot·ing, de·motes
To reduce in grade, rank, or status.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Reason has nothing to do whether it was a demotion or not. Zambrano's role was reduced in grade, rank, and status, thus he was demoted.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Leaving aside the fact that roles in the bullpen are not necessarily always a lower rank or status than starting (I'd guess that many closers and top setup men would not like to be put in the rotation, and I'd guess that some starters would view becoming a closer or 8th inning man as a lateral move), reducing the discussion to the dictionary definition of "demotion" completely misses the point - which is that the Cubs did not move Zambrano to the bullpen IN ORDER TO DEMOTE HIM. They ***HAD*** to move ***SOMEBODY*** to the bullpen. They chose Zambrano. I don't see that situation as a "demotion," regardless of the semantics surrounding what Webster has to say about the word "demotion." In other words - if we must be stuck on the dictionary definition - from the Cubs' perspective, they were not "reducing Z's grade, rank, or status;" they were changing his role. *From the Cubs' perspective* is the only point I've been making, and that part is wholly about reason.
This all, of course, is the most ridiculous discussion ever, since we all (that is to say, all of us in this recent spate) agree that Zambrano was the wrong choice (for whatever your reasons) to be moved to the pen at the time.
tr.v. de·mot·ed, de·mot·ing, de·motes
To reduce in grade, rank, or status.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Reason has nothing to do whether it was a demotion or not. Zambrano's role was reduced in grade, rank, and status, thus he was demoted.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Leaving aside the fact that roles in the bullpen are not necessarily always a lower rank or status than starting (I'd guess that many closers and top setup men would not like to be put in the rotation, and I'd guess that some starters would view becoming a closer or 8th inning man as a lateral move), reducing the discussion to the dictionary definition of "demotion" completely misses the point - which is that the Cubs did not move Zambrano to the bullpen IN ORDER TO DEMOTE HIM. They ***HAD*** to move ***SOMEBODY*** to the bullpen. They chose Zambrano. I don't see that situation as a "demotion," regardless of the semantics surrounding what Webster has to say about the word "demotion." In other words - if we must be stuck on the dictionary definition - from the Cubs' perspective, they were not "reducing Z's grade, rank, or status;" they were changing his role. *From the Cubs' perspective* is the only point I've been making, and that part is wholly about reason.
This all, of course, is the most ridiculous discussion ever, since we all (that is to say, all of us in this recent spate) agree that Zambrano was the wrong choice (for whatever your reasons) to be moved to the pen at the time.
Cubs News and Rumors at Bleacher Nation.