Pearce, Moss, or Raynor?
by zogger on Mar 19, 2010 5:38 PM EDT
Email
PrintSo with Young looking like he will make the team (and Ramon Vazquez to be traded or released), that leaves the 3 Amigoes fighting for the last bench spot. Each has not really impressed much with the bat.
I think Pearce will be the guy. He can play two positions (1st base and OF) and is righthanded. He can spot Clement at 1st base if he falters.
Moss finally got a hit today, but he has not impressed me much. Why would we want to give him (another lefthander) ML at bats when he can't even hit in Spring Training? Moss is out of options so if he does not make it, he needs to pass waivers to go to AAA. Who would want to take him?
I haven't see Raynor do much (except for a HR today). Raynor is a Rule 5, so if we want to keep him, we have to make a deal to keep him is he does not make the team. Maybe we can buy him for $100K or some Class A guy.
So if I had to choose, I'd keep Pearce and do the best I could to keep the others to play at AAA.
Comments?
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of the managing editor (Charlie) or SB Nation. FanPosts are written by Bucs Dugout readers.
47 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
just so the situation is clearer
pearce does have an option left…
i m voting (and guessing that mgmt will keep) raynor at this point
keep raynor
he is perfect 5th outfielder ,can run plays all the outfield positions and I think the other guys will clear waivers. trade or release vasquez.
If Raynor doesn't make the roster...
Pearce almost has to…because the only RH bat off the bench would be Crosby.
Moss
I think the biggest factor of all will be that Moss was in the Bay deal, which the return has not looked good to this point, and getting rid of Moss admits their failure. I say they keep him to save face, and hopefully his bat turns around.
They don't seem to be thrilled
with Raynor’s shown speed and defense. So, I don’t think he will make the team and they’ll keep Moss.
Raynor cannot be bought
We can’t deal for Raynor to send him down. He’d still have to pass through waivers and another team could claim him. I’d feel better about Raynor if his defense was being raved about, but it sounds like he’s kind of struggling there. I think with Pearce’s option, he’ll be sent down just to buy more time if they go with Raynor, and I hope they do. I’m not sure what Moss’s problem is, but it’s hard to make a strong case for him.
Can we get rid of the ads
in every fanpost?
Keep Pearce, forget the option year. We’re starting to stockpile acceptable talent. This year or next, we’ll have Tabata available. There are always 4th/5th OF types who can be signed to MiLB contracts w/an invite to Sprint Graining
Send Pearce to the minors
he has an option left,(I think) let raynor stay in the majors for the first month and see how it goes. I hate to let Moss go, he didnt even have 500 AB’s last yr, but the ones he got he really stunk.
I'd keep Raynor.
I like his tools. That said, I think they option Pearce and keep Moss. Hopefully Raynor will clear waivers and we can work out a deal.
Interesting...
that Jones played 1B today. I would have thought that if Clement was a done deal…Jones would be playing RF consistently.
Worth noting...
…but I suspect it’ll turn out that they just wanted to see Jones get a little time there in case he ends up being needed at the position (by virtue of Clement blowing his shot or getting hurt or whatever).
4 million
spent for vazquez for 2 years and we lose out on sano for 500k, lucy you have some splaining to do. ps also very burnitz like. hmmmm
They didn't lose out on Sano for $500k.
They lost out on Sano because the agent lied to them. They were willing to pay him MORE than he got from the Twins – they just never got the chance.
Hats off to Vlad
for typing this reply every time the Sano $500 K thing comes up. Or do you have that saved as a hot key. Oh, the Sano garbage, reply, F9, post. It’s like flagging spam I guess.
twins 3.1 vs pirates 2.6
so lets do some math ,yup 500k. the 4 million they paid vazquez could have rapped up the sano signing in july. ahh resources ,its what you do with them.
For that matter, how many Sanos could Chicago have had for Milton Bradley’s salary that they are paying this year? I guess you would prefer all the money goes to minor league players and none to the MLB players.
by MarkInDallas on Mar 23, 2010 3:55 PM EDT up reply actions
4 million for a bench player
is just plain stupid, you pay veteran minimum for a back up and only for 1 year.
by wishiewashie on Mar 23, 2010 7:44 PM EDT up reply actions
The Pirates either have to pay a premium for vets or provide them an opportunity they wouldn’t otherwise have. Vasquez was coming off a very good season, and he was signed when the Pirates had their infield pretty much set. There was never a question about Vasquez’s role like there is with Crosby and Church.
Those guys came to the Pirates because there might be a way for them to play themselves into a starting position. Same with Dotel and most of the relief guys. Dotel gets the chance to close, and therefore the Pirates don’t have to overpay.
If Cedeno busts out this year and is seen as a real starting shortstop, you can bet that Crosby won’t be sticking around for the minimum.
by MarkInDallas on Mar 23, 2010 10:31 PM EDT up reply actions
come
they will spend 4 million on vasquez and release him this year that looks like 4 million for 1 year. ps they won’t release they will trade him and pick 1.2 million.
by wishiewashie on Mar 25, 2010 12:53 PM EDT up reply actions
If they end up releasing Vazquez this spring...
…(which they might or might not), then our 2010 commitment to him will be reduced by the salary paid by whatever team subsequently signs him.
Thus, the only way we’ll end up paying him $4M for one year is if we cut him in spring training and he spends the entire remainder of the year out of organized baseball. Which seems unlikely.
First....
get your facts right. It wasn’t 4 million. It was either $4 million/2yrs. or $2 million per. You aren’t paying a veteran bench player less than $1 per. It didn’t work out as hoped, but absolutely nothing wrong with the logic or process.
Thank you...
I was going to post this but I just didn’t want to get involved with someone whose sole purpose for posting is to bash Huntington on everything! Plus I don’t have Vlad’s patience. I can only read about Sano and Vasquez so many times before I just stop reading his posts.
2 million + 2 million =4million
that is 13% of our current payroll,for a guy who may get 300 ab’s over two years. now if we saved that money and not wasted it we could have sign sano.
by wishiewashie on Mar 25, 2010 12:56 PM EDT up reply actions
That's nice that you can add...
you can also twist facts because you keep saying that he was signed for $4 million for one year and that is not the case. It was a 2 year @ 2 million per year contract. NH did not sign him to that contract at the time thinking he was going to cut him. Furthermore, the Vasquez signing had absolutely nothing to do with Sano. You are either incredibly stubborn, slow or a troll because you have been told several times that we had the approval to spend more money to sign Sano. MONEY was NOT the issue! You can say the NH blew the deal because he didn’t it get it done, you can say that the agent was at fault for being dishonest or you can blame Gayo for being overly aggressive…but you cannot blame Nutting or NH for being cheap because it has been reported by DK more than a handful of times that they had approval to spend way more money than their last offer.
Now if you are going to keep ignoring facts that don’t agree with your opinon without providing real facts of your own to support your position (and by real I mean accurate and not distorted or made up…facts from a legitmiate source like DK from the Post-Gazzete and not a poster in Smizik’s comment section) then please don’t reply to me anymore. I’d find more entertaining, and probably insightful, smashing my head into a brick wall.
So you're suggesting...
…that we should’ve taken that $4M and hired someone to murder Plummer, in the hope that he’d be replaced by a different agent who’d actually give us a chance to present our offer?
Because otherwise, I don’t see how money could have really changed the situation. We were already willing to pay more than Minnesota. Being willing to outspend them by an even greater amount still wouldn’t have gotten our foot in the door.
You do know...
…that the team was already prepared to go well above the Twins’ offer for Sano, but never got the chance to present their final bid because Sano’s agent lied to them, right?
You should. I’ve pointed it out to you often enough…
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Mar 23, 2010 5:19 PM EDT up reply actions
would of
could of ,should of. but they didn’t,
by wishiewashie on Mar 23, 2010 7:42 PM EDT up reply actions
If they had no opportunity to perform the action in question...
…then logic would tend to indicate that they can not reasonably be blamed for failing to perform the aforementioned action.
That’s if you use logic, of course.
I'll be disappointed, to be sure.
But if he ain’t producing, then he doesn’t make it.
What I’ve always objected to was JR’s handling of him, as pointed out by others (bucdaddy? thunder? troggs? – I’m not sure), in that he was being benched after a couple of good games, and also people’s knee-jerk reactions on this board.. But Jones hasn’t sat out a game since he was called up, as noted previously by others.
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Mar 24, 2010 12:20 AM EDT up reply actions
That seemed to be the case...
with Pearce and Moss (mainly the last third of the season) last year. Have a good game or two…and immediately sit the next game…with little rhyme or reason. It wasn’t even RHP vs LHP that was making a difference. I’d put Bixler on that list…but that would have required him to actually have a good game.
There was a system.
Russell’s big on scheduling rest days in advance.
Note that I’m not necessarily saying it’s a good system – but it wasn’t totally random.
It was clear to me
There was no platoon. They wanted to see what each could do against righties and lefties. The playing time was scheduled ahead of time. They obviously don’ believe that “riding the hot hand” has any validity. That certainly frustrates many fans who do believe in that. But that has very little to do with Russell I’m sure.
by MarkInDallas on Mar 25, 2010 4:50 PM EDT up reply actions
july 2 2009
mr agent 3.5 million for sano you have 72 hr, or the offer is off the table. sign N.HUNTINGTON. ps we will also inform momma sano our offer,if you turn us down.
well that ruins the game of haggling doesn’t it?
by BlindSquirrel on Mar 23, 2010 9:01 PM EDT up reply actions
Wishiewashie buying a car:
“Here’s all of my money, Mr. Salesman!”
[Dumps shoebox full of bills on the desk.]
“What can I get for it?”
Final Solution
Well we guessed it right! Moss was DFaed, Pearce was optioned to AA, and Raynor made the team. Also Vasquez was DFAed.
So our poll was correct!
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bucs Dugout
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
