Posts: 11,837
Threads: 390
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=44538:date=Jun 16 2009, 05:05 PM:name=Destined)-->QUOTE (Destined @ Jun 16 2009, 05:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=44537:date=Jun 16 2009, 03:03 PM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jun 16 2009, 03:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I said Rule 25 and nobody called me on it.
This is <b>a </b>SOI first.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Fixed.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Wrong.
The choice of article is actually based upon the phonetic quality of the first letter in a word, not on the written representation of the letter. If the first letter makes a vowel-type sound, you use "an"; if the first letter would make a consonant-type sound, you use "a."
"SOI" sounds like "ess-oh-eye." So you use an "an."
Posts: 3,801
Threads: 68
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=44540:date=Jun 16 2009, 03:17 PM:name=Butcher)-->QUOTE (Butcher @ Jun 16 2009, 03:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=44538:date=Jun 16 2009, 05:05 PM:name=Destined)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Destined @ Jun 16 2009, 05:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=44537:date=Jun 16 2009, 03:03 PM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jun 16 2009, 03:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I said Rule 25 and nobody called me on it.
This is <b>a </b>SOI first.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Fixed.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Wrong.
The choice of article is actually based upon the phonetic quality of the first letter in a word, not on the written representation of the letter. If the first letter makes a vowel-type sound, you use "an"; if the first letter would make a consonant-type sound, you use "a."
"SOI" sounds like "ess-oh-eye." So you use an "an."
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That's right. However I read it as "Soy."
I hate my pretentious sounding username too.
Posts: 11,837
Threads: 390
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=44543:date=Jun 16 2009, 05:28 PM:name=Destined)-->QUOTE (Destined @ Jun 16 2009, 05:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=44540:date=Jun 16 2009, 03:17 PM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jun 16 2009, 03:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=44538:date=Jun 16 2009, 05:05 PM:name=Destined)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Destined @ Jun 16 2009, 05:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=44537:date=Jun 16 2009, 03:03 PM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jun 16 2009, 03:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I said Rule 25 and nobody called me on it.
This is <b>a </b>SOI first.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Fixed.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Wrong.
The choice of article is actually based upon the phonetic quality of the first letter in a word, not on the written representation of the letter. If the first letter makes a vowel-type sound, you use "an"; if the first letter would make a consonant-type sound, you use "a."
"SOI" sounds like "ess-oh-eye." So you use an "an."
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That's right. However I read it as "Soy."
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif[/img]
Posts: 192
Threads: 1
Joined: Jun 2009
Reputation:
0
Soriano needs a day off. Try Fox out in left.
Posts: 3,801
Threads: 68
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=44544:date=Jun 16 2009, 03:29 PM:name=Butcher)-->QUOTE (Butcher @ Jun 16 2009, 03:29 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=44543:date=Jun 16 2009, 05:28 PM:name=Destined)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Destined @ Jun 16 2009, 05:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=44540:date=Jun 16 2009, 03:17 PM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jun 16 2009, 03:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=44538:date=Jun 16 2009, 05:05 PM:name=Destined)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Destined @ Jun 16 2009, 05:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=44537:date=Jun 16 2009, 03:03 PM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jun 16 2009, 03:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I said Rule 25 and nobody called me on it.
This is <b>a </b>SOI first.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Fixed.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Wrong.
The choice of article is actually based upon the phonetic quality of the first letter in a word, not on the written representation of the letter. If the first letter makes a vowel-type sound, you use "an"; if the first letter would make a consonant-type sound, you use "a."
"SOI" sounds like "ess-oh-eye." So you use an "an."
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That's right. However I read it as "Soy."
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif[/img]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So I take it SOITOW isn't "Soy-Tow."
I hate my pretentious sounding username too.
Posts: 3,011
Threads: 81
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->Have you ever heard of the Red Sox or the Yankees trying to hide a Rule 25 guy on their roster? It's ridiculous.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Umm, yes?
In 2003, the Red Sox kept Lenny DiNardo on their team all year.
In 2004 the Red Sox kept Adam Stern on their roster for TWO years, as he got hurt in the first one. He was on the team for the required time, and was eventually traded to the Orioles in the Javy Lopez deal.
In 2007 the Yankees kept Josh Phelps on their team until June 17th (today's date I might add).
In 2009 the Red Sox took Miguel Gonzalez. He blew out his arm, but is still on the roster, and will have to play in 2010, or they will have to give him back.
I might also add that 2 years ago the blue jays took Randy Wells, and probably wished they had kept him.
The rule 5 draft is not the domain of just crappy teams. Hiding Patton is completely justifiable, unless his spot is costing us in some way. I can't see how it is.
I wish that I believed in Fate. I wish I didn't sleep so late. I used to be carried in the arms of cheerleaders.
Posts: 14,130
Threads: 90
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=44681:date=Jun 17 2009, 12:03 PM:name=BT)-->QUOTE (BT @ Jun 17 2009, 12:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <!--quotec-->Have you ever heard of the Red Sox or the Yankees trying to hide a Rule 25 guy on their roster? It's ridiculous.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Umm, yes?
In 2003, the Red Sox kept Lenny DiNardo on their team all year.
In 2004 the Red Sox kept Adam Stern on their roster for TWO years, as he got hurt in the first one. He was on the team for the required time, and was eventually traded to the Orioles in the Javy Lopez deal.
In 2007 the Yankees kept Josh Phelps on their team until June 17th (today's date I might add).
In 2009 the Red Sox took Miguel Gonzalez. He blew out his arm, but is still on the roster, and will have to play in 2010, or they will have to give him back.
I might also add that 2 years ago the blue jays took Randy Wells, and probably wished they had kept him.
The rule 5 draft is not the domain of just crappy teams. Hiding Patton is completely justifiable, unless his spot is costing us in some way. I can't see how it is.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, when we had 13 pitchers on the 25 man for a week, I think he might have cost us some depth for a few games. I know that might be splitting hairs, but for a guy who has shown us absolutely nil thus far, it is still quite funny to me how he's being protected. What's the risk on losing this guy if he's looked upon as a 25th man at best? Or maybe others feel he has more potential than that, but it's hard to imagine that's the case.
Posts: 3,011
Threads: 81
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=44689:date=Jun 17 2009, 12:58 PM:name=rok)-->QUOTE (rok @ Jun 17 2009, 12:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=44681:date=Jun 17 2009, 12:03 PM:name=BT)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BT @ Jun 17 2009, 12:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <!--quotec-->Have you ever heard of the Red Sox or the Yankees trying to hide a Rule 25 guy on their roster? It's ridiculous.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Umm, yes?
In 2003, the Red Sox kept Lenny DiNardo on their team all year.
In 2004 the Red Sox kept Adam Stern on their roster for TWO years, as he got hurt in the first one. He was on the team for the required time, and was eventually traded to the Orioles in the Javy Lopez deal.
In 2007 the Yankees kept Josh Phelps on their team until June 17th (today's date I might add).
In 2009 the Red Sox took Miguel Gonzalez. He blew out his arm, but is still on the roster, and will have to play in 2010, or they will have to give him back.
I might also add that 2 years ago the blue jays took Randy Wells, and probably wished they had kept him.
The rule 5 draft is not the domain of just crappy teams. Hiding Patton is completely justifiable, unless his spot is costing us in some way. I can't see how it is.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, when we had 13 pitchers on the 25 man for a week, I think he might have cost us some depth for a few games. I know that might be splitting hairs, but for a guy who has shown us absolutely nil thus far, it is still quite funny to me how he's being protected. What's the risk on losing this guy if he's looked upon as a 25th man at best? Or maybe others feel he has more potential than that, but it's hard to imagine that's the case.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If they thought he was going to perpetually be a 25th man, they wouldn't be bothering with him. They think he can be more than that obviously.
And while you might be right about the depth thing, if Bobby Scales is your 24th man, are you really deep enough to matter? Even now, Fox has been called up, but Lou admits he will get almost no playing time. Whose spot was Patton taking away? What player isn't getting time that should be?
Bear in mind, the eruptions of pissing an moaning occurred because Hendry had the gall to cut Gaudin. Would we really be better off with his 6.16 ERA right now (actually it might be worse, since Gaudin is pitching in a much better pitchers park)?
I wish that I believed in Fate. I wish I didn't sleep so late. I used to be carried in the arms of cheerleaders.
Posts: 560
Threads: 6
Joined: May 2009
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=44699:date=Jun 17 2009, 02:28 PM:name=BT)-->QUOTE (BT @ Jun 17 2009, 02:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=44689:date=Jun 17 2009, 12:58 PM:name=rok)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (rok @ Jun 17 2009, 12:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=44681:date=Jun 17 2009, 12:03 PM:name=BT)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BT @ Jun 17 2009, 12:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <!--quotec-->Have you ever heard of the Red Sox or the Yankees trying to hide a Rule 25 guy on their roster? It's ridiculous.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Umm, yes?
In 2003, the Red Sox kept Lenny DiNardo on their team all year.
In 2004 the Red Sox kept Adam Stern on their roster for TWO years, as he got hurt in the first one. He was on the team for the required time, and was eventually traded to the Orioles in the Javy Lopez deal.
In 2007 the Yankees kept Josh Phelps on their team until June 17th (today's date I might add).
In 2009 the Red Sox took Miguel Gonzalez. He blew out his arm, but is still on the roster, and will have to play in 2010, or they will have to give him back.
I might also add that 2 years ago the blue jays took Randy Wells, and probably wished they had kept him.
The rule 5 draft is not the domain of just crappy teams. Hiding Patton is completely justifiable, unless his spot is costing us in some way. I can't see how it is.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, when we had 13 pitchers on the 25 man for a week, I think he might have cost us some depth for a few games. I know that might be splitting hairs, but for a guy who has shown us absolutely nil thus far, it is still quite funny to me how he's being protected. What's the risk on losing this guy if he's looked upon as a 25th man at best? Or maybe others feel he has more potential than that, but it's hard to imagine that's the case.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If they thought he was going to perpetually be a 25th man, they wouldn't be bothering with him. They think he can be more than that obviously.
And while you might be right about the depth thing, if Bobby Scales is your 24th man, are you really deep enough to matter? Even now, Fox has been called up, but Lou admits he will get almost no playing time. Whose spot was Patton taking away? What player isn't getting time that should be?
Bear in mind, the eruptions of pissing an moaning occurred because Hendry had the gall to cut Gaudin. Would we really be better off with his 6.16 ERA right now (actually it might be worse, since Gaudin is pitching in a much better pitchers park)?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It amazes me that Fox has basically won the triple crown in AAA, hit like .450 in the majors this year and can't get any at bats.
Posts: 3,801
Threads: 68
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=44705:date=Jun 17 2009, 11:35 AM:name=vitaminB)-->QUOTE (vitaminB @ Jun 17 2009, 11:35 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=44699:date=Jun 17 2009, 02:28 PM:name=BT)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BT @ Jun 17 2009, 02:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=44689:date=Jun 17 2009, 12:58 PM:name=rok)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (rok @ Jun 17 2009, 12:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=44681:date=Jun 17 2009, 12:03 PM:name=BT)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BT @ Jun 17 2009, 12:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <!--quotec-->Have you ever heard of the Red Sox or the Yankees trying to hide a Rule 25 guy on their roster? It's ridiculous.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Umm, yes?
In 2003, the Red Sox kept Lenny DiNardo on their team all year.
In 2004 the Red Sox kept Adam Stern on their roster for TWO years, as he got hurt in the first one. He was on the team for the required time, and was eventually traded to the Orioles in the Javy Lopez deal.
In 2007 the Yankees kept Josh Phelps on their team until June 17th (today's date I might add).
In 2009 the Red Sox took Miguel Gonzalez. He blew out his arm, but is still on the roster, and will have to play in 2010, or they will have to give him back.
I might also add that 2 years ago the blue jays took Randy Wells, and probably wished they had kept him.
The rule 5 draft is not the domain of just crappy teams. Hiding Patton is completely justifiable, unless his spot is costing us in some way. I can't see how it is.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, when we had 13 pitchers on the 25 man for a week, I think he might have cost us some depth for a few games. I know that might be splitting hairs, but for a guy who has shown us absolutely nil thus far, it is still quite funny to me how he's being protected. What's the risk on losing this guy if he's looked upon as a 25th man at best? Or maybe others feel he has more potential than that, but it's hard to imagine that's the case.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If they thought he was going to perpetually be a 25th man, they wouldn't be bothering with him. They think he can be more than that obviously.
And while you might be right about the depth thing, if Bobby Scales is your 24th man, are you really deep enough to matter? Even now, Fox has been called up, but Lou admits he will get almost no playing time. Whose spot was Patton taking away? What player isn't getting time that should be?
Bear in mind, the eruptions of pissing an moaning occurred because Hendry had the gall to cut Gaudin. Would we really be better off with his 6.16 ERA right now (actually it might be worse, since Gaudin is pitching in a much better pitchers park)?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It amazes me that Fox has basically won the triple crown in AAA, hit like .450 in the majors this year and can't get any at bats.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Where are we supposed to play him? He's a liability defensively. He has no position.
I hate my pretentious sounding username too.
Posts: 1,436
Threads: 28
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=44729:date=Jun 17 2009, 02:07 PM:name=Destined)-->QUOTE (Destined @ Jun 17 2009, 02:07 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=44705:date=Jun 17 2009, 11:35 AM:name=vitaminB)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (vitaminB @ Jun 17 2009, 11:35 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=44699:date=Jun 17 2009, 02:28 PM:name=BT)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BT @ Jun 17 2009, 02:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=44689:date=Jun 17 2009, 12:58 PM:name=rok)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (rok @ Jun 17 2009, 12:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=44681:date=Jun 17 2009, 12:03 PM:name=BT)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BT @ Jun 17 2009, 12:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <!--quotec-->Have you ever heard of the Red Sox or the Yankees trying to hide a Rule 25 guy on their roster? It's ridiculous.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Umm, yes?
In 2003, the Red Sox kept Lenny DiNardo on their team all year.
In 2004 the Red Sox kept Adam Stern on their roster for TWO years, as he got hurt in the first one. He was on the team for the required time, and was eventually traded to the Orioles in the Javy Lopez deal.
In 2007 the Yankees kept Josh Phelps on their team until June 17th (today's date I might add).
In 2009 the Red Sox took Miguel Gonzalez. He blew out his arm, but is still on the roster, and will have to play in 2010, or they will have to give him back.
I might also add that 2 years ago the blue jays took Randy Wells, and probably wished they had kept him.
The rule 5 draft is not the domain of just crappy teams. Hiding Patton is completely justifiable, unless his spot is costing us in some way. I can't see how it is.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, when we had 13 pitchers on the 25 man for a week, I think he might have cost us some depth for a few games. I know that might be splitting hairs, but for a guy who has shown us absolutely nil thus far, it is still quite funny to me how he's being protected. What's the risk on losing this guy if he's looked upon as a 25th man at best? Or maybe others feel he has more potential than that, but it's hard to imagine that's the case.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If they thought he was going to perpetually be a 25th man, they wouldn't be bothering with him. They think he can be more than that obviously.
And while you might be right about the depth thing, if Bobby Scales is your 24th man, are you really deep enough to matter? Even now, Fox has been called up, but Lou admits he will get almost no playing time. Whose spot was Patton taking away? What player isn't getting time that should be?
Bear in mind, the eruptions of pissing an moaning occurred because Hendry had the gall to cut Gaudin. Would we really be better off with his 6.16 ERA right now (actually it might be worse, since Gaudin is pitching in a much better pitchers park)?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It amazes me that Fox has basically won the triple crown in AAA, hit like .450 in the majors this year and can't get any at bats.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Where are we supposed to play him? He's a liability defensively. He has no position.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I've gotta think no matter how awful he would be defensively at 3B he would outhit Miles and his paltry .492 OPS by so much that it would outweigh his poor defense. When your team can't score any runs you've gotta try to be more creative.
Posts: 3,011
Threads: 81
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
I'd put Fox at 3b tomorrow, and take my chances.
I wish that I believed in Fate. I wish I didn't sleep so late. I used to be carried in the arms of cheerleaders.
Posts: 1,300
Threads: 103
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=44768:date=Jun 17 2009, 01:03 PM:name=Brock)-->QUOTE (Brock @ Jun 17 2009, 01:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=44729:date=Jun 17 2009, 02:07 PM:name=Destined)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Destined @ Jun 17 2009, 02:07 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=44705:date=Jun 17 2009, 11:35 AM:name=vitaminB)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (vitaminB @ Jun 17 2009, 11:35 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=44699:date=Jun 17 2009, 02:28 PM:name=BT)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BT @ Jun 17 2009, 02:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=44689:date=Jun 17 2009, 12:58 PM:name=rok)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (rok @ Jun 17 2009, 12:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=44681:date=Jun 17 2009, 12:03 PM:name=BT)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BT @ Jun 17 2009, 12:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <!--quotec-->Have you ever heard of the Red Sox or the Yankees trying to hide a Rule 25 guy on their roster? It's ridiculous.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Umm, yes?
In 2003, the Red Sox kept Lenny DiNardo on their team all year.
In 2004 the Red Sox kept Adam Stern on their roster for TWO years, as he got hurt in the first one. He was on the team for the required time, and was eventually traded to the Orioles in the Javy Lopez deal.
In 2007 the Yankees kept Josh Phelps on their team until June 17th (today's date I might add).
In 2009 the Red Sox took Miguel Gonzalez. He blew out his arm, but is still on the roster, and will have to play in 2010, or they will have to give him back.
I might also add that 2 years ago the blue jays took Randy Wells, and probably wished they had kept him.
The rule 5 draft is not the domain of just crappy teams. Hiding Patton is completely justifiable, unless his spot is costing us in some way. I can't see how it is.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, when we had 13 pitchers on the 25 man for a week, I think he might have cost us some depth for a few games. I know that might be splitting hairs, but for a guy who has shown us absolutely nil thus far, it is still quite funny to me how he's being protected. What's the risk on losing this guy if he's looked upon as a 25th man at best? Or maybe others feel he has more potential than that, but it's hard to imagine that's the case.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If they thought he was going to perpetually be a 25th man, they wouldn't be bothering with him. They think he can be more than that obviously.
And while you might be right about the depth thing, if Bobby Scales is your 24th man, are you really deep enough to matter? Even now, Fox has been called up, but Lou admits he will get almost no playing time. Whose spot was Patton taking away? What player isn't getting time that should be?
Bear in mind, the eruptions of pissing an moaning occurred because Hendry had the gall to cut Gaudin. Would we really be better off with his 6.16 ERA right now (actually it might be worse, since Gaudin is pitching in a much better pitchers park)?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It amazes me that Fox has basically won the triple crown in AAA, hit like .450 in the majors this year and can't get any at bats.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Where are we supposed to play him? He's a liability defensively. He has no position.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I've gotta think no matter how awful he would be defensively at 3B he would outhit Miles and his paltry .492 OPS by so much that it would outweigh his poor defense. When your team can't score any runs you've gotta try to be more creative.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree. We already have Soriano and Bradley out there. Fuck. What's one more shitty defensive player out there?
Posts: 6,490
Threads: 24
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
Can't get any worse right?
Posts: 4,641
Threads: 210
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=44836:date=Jun 17 2009, 11:53 PM:name=BT)-->QUOTE (BT @ Jun 17 2009, 11:53 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I'd put Fox at 3b tomorrow, and take my chances.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Exactly. I mean, why the fuck not?
|
