Sox to pitch buchholz on 3 days rest

[Yaz Sideburn]

The Sox limited Clay Buchholz to 95 pitches and five innings in the opener, a 3-1 loss to the White Sox because they'd like to bring him back Wednesday.

 

http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/extras/extra_bases/

 

what do you guys think of this? a desperate ploy to keep fans in the seats? a respectable effort to get buchholz enough innings/wins as possible to make a case for cy young? an irresponsible move for them to risk the health of their young ace with the season all but over?

[BSN07]

I'm iffy on this.

[Spudboy]

I'm iffy on this.

 

So am I.

[Cocos Disciples]

This is stupid.

[a700hitter]

It's no biggie.

[Yaz Sideburn]

This is stupid.

 

yup

[Dojji]

It's not stupid to pitch a guy on 3 day's rest if there's something at stake, pitchers can take it as long as you don't overdo it. What's stupid is there's nothing at stake here. The season is over in terms of a playoff run. Not the best time to be pushing probably your best arm into a potentially injury-inducing overdrive

[ORS]

While there certainly is nothing at stake this season, it's not a bad idea to let him get a taste of pitching on short rest should there be something at stake in the future. I would hope they don't do this for the rest of this season, but it's not a big deal if he does it a couple of times, IMO.

[boston22407]

its dum

wtf he is not going to win it .even if he goes 5-0 in September .dum dum dum

[jacksonianmarch]

The sox have nothing to play for, why would you change the schedule of a young arm for the worse? This makes no sense

[example1]

I don't like it. For a team that sits down top prospects early because of IP limits, lets players rehab for weeks instead of having them come to the big club, and loses top FAs over clauses related to potential injuries this move does not seem to make sense. There must be something else going on. Are they doing this to save someone else's arm? why not start Doubront?

[Station 13]

The sox have nothing to play for' date=' why would you change the schedule of a young arm for the worse? This makes no sense[/quote']

 

It also annoy me they still depending on Bard to get 6 outs.

[jacksonianmarch]

I don't like it. For a team that sits down top prospects early because of IP limits' date=' lets players rehab for weeks instead of having them come to the big club, and loses top FAs over clauses related to potential injuries this move does not seem to make sense. There must be something else going on. Are they doing this to save someone else's arm? why not start Doubront?[/quote']

 

Doubront has been shortened, starting him is a disaster waiting to happen. But who gives a f***. Start Wakefield and then offer him a nice retirement package. The sox are 8 games out of a playoff spot with 26 games to play. Who are they fooling?

[a700hitter]

Doubront has been shortened' date=' starting him is a disaster waiting to happen. But who gives a f***. Start Wakefield and then offer him a nice retirement package. The sox are 8 games out of a playoff spot with 26 games to play. Who are they fooling?[/quote']The idea is not to roll over to the other contender and to put out the most competitive team they can against teams in the playoff race. Would you want the Sox to roll over against the Rays and bring up all of AAA?

[jacksonianmarch]

As a Yankee fan, I hope the sox sweep the Rays and put their best foot forward. But if I were a sox fan, all I would care about is the long term health of my club and for next season.

[BSN07]

Maybe the Sox allocated Buchholz some post season innings they don't think he is going to get now. And this will help him reach the innings total they were hoping he progress to this season. Just a possibility.

[db41]

Stupid. I believe it's a ploy to make us think that the season isn't over and they really are trying... honest.

[example1]

Doubront has been shortened' date=' starting him is a disaster waiting to happen. But who gives a f***. Start Wakefield and then offer him a nice retirement package. The sox are 8 games out of a playoff spot with 26 games to play. Who are they fooling?[/quote']

 

I think Doubront could handle one start. Or he could handle a start split with Bowden. Or, as you said, Wakefield could start. I don't f***ing care. The only goal at this point should be to minimize the risk of injuries that would impact this team longterm, IMO.

 

Given the luck that they've had this year I could see Buchholz getting injured in a situation like this.

[SCM33]

Stupid. I believe it's a ploy to make us think that the season isn't over and they really are trying... honest.

 

You mean like claiming Johnny Damon.....knowing that he had a no trade clause because he hates the front office. They knew he would refuse it but at least they could say "we tried".

 

It all comes down to attendance and ratings in their eyes. Baseball just gets in their way.

[ORS]

Yeah, it's those annoying things like spending $26M on two useless years of Mike Lowell when there were no other, better alternatives in 2008 for 3B, or making the roster better by shipping Lugo off while paying the remaining $18M on the bill, and let's not forget a similar scenario with Renteria, and bringing in the best looking pitcher for $100M in Matsuzaka.....all those things just scream "bottom line", don't they?

 

Sure, some of them didn't work out, that's professional sports in a nutshell, but the load of utter ******** that is your moaning about how cheap they are is getting tired. The facts just don't play nice with the nonsense you spout off about.

[SCM33]

Yeah, it's those annoying things like spending $26M on two useless years of Mike Lowell when there were no other, better alternatives in 2008 for 3B, or making the roster better by shipping Lugo off while paying the remaining $18M on the bill, and let's not forget a similar scenario with Renteria, and bringing in the best looking pitcher for $100M in Matsuzaka.....all those things just scream "bottom line", don't they?

 

Sure, some of them didn't work out, that's professional sports in a nutshell, but the load of utter ******** that is your moaning about how cheap they are is getting tired. The facts just don't play nice with the nonsense you spout off about.

 

Im sorry.....you really think they thought Damon was going to waive his no trade clause to come to Boston after they f***ed him? If you do, your an idiot.....he made it a point to add Boston to that list because he already played that song and dance and they bent him over.

[ORS]

WTF does Damon have to do with what I'm saying? You are making blanket statements about their motives that I am arguing against. Don't lose the forrest for the inconsequential tree.

[SCM33]

WTF does Damon have to do with what I'm saying? You are making blanket statements about their motives that I am arguing against. Don't lose the forrest for the inconsequential tree.

 

My statement regarding Damon. You replied with something other than my comment/statement. I replied with comment referring back to my original Damon comment.

[ORS]

Your statment about Damon concluded with a general statement about their overall motives, one you've been pimping here for a while. It's pretty clear that's what I'm responding to. Don't play dense, unless that's what you are.

[SCM33]

Your statment about Damon concluded with a general statement about their overall motives' date=' one you've been pimping here for a while. It's pretty clear that's what I'm responding to. Don't play dense, unless that's what you are.[/quote']

 

ORS, youve decided to just attack every post in two threads in a matter of 10 minutes. I dont feel like littering the boards with crap, so lay off. You dont agree with me, then fine.....enough with the ********.

[ORS]

Wait, wait, wait, what was that about littering the boards with crap? That's what you've been doing for months with your accusations. It's crap. Sure, it's your opinion, but that's what places like this are for. Places of discussion. Were you under some other impression? Did you think this was just a repository for your illogical rants? If that's what this place is, I want no part in it. Make a post, take the consequence of what you say, ie accept the rebuttal. The more vitriolic the post, the more you should expect from the response. You and I envision two very different places. I have no desire to experience, nor do I think this is the place of, your mental toilet. I think you should expect to stand by what you say here. If you don't want to, then don't say it.

[example1]

FWIW, ORS hasn't laid into me yet. (holds breath)

 

He's actually right though. It is easy to rip on the sox for not going after the big fish when they don't go after the fish that you want. It is much more difficult when you step back and realize that they have both landed big fish (Drew, Lackey, Dice-K, Renteria, etc.,) and big fish draft picks. They have also made at least one public run at a big fish (Teixeira) that didn't end well but which was still significant in that they tried (compared to, say, Matt Holliday who they inquired about but didn't pursue). The difference is that the go after the fish who they think will fill their need and not after ones they don't like as much.

 

The more fruitful discussion, in my opinion, is always about the philosophy that leads them to prefer one fish over another. I imagine we will be seeing a signficant change in the roster for this team over the next two years and I'm expecting some good players will be coming our way. Otherwise they can expect ratings and ticket sales to drop continually.

[SCM33]

FWIW, ORS hasn't laid into me yet. (holds breath)

 

He's actually right though. It is easy to rip on the sox for not going after the big fish when they don't go after the fish that you want. It is much more difficult when you step back and realize that they have both landed big fish (Drew, Lackey, Dice-K, Renteria, etc.,) and big fish draft picks. They have also made at least one public run at a big fish (Teixeira) that didn't end well but which was still significant in that they tried (compared to, say, Matt Holliday who they inquired about but didn't pursue). The difference is that the go after the fish who they think will fill their need and not after ones they don't like as much.

 

The more fruitful discussion, in my opinion, is always about the philosophy that leads them to prefer one fish over another. I imagine we will be seeing a signficant change in the roster for this team over the next two years and I'm expecting some good players will be coming our way. Otherwise they can expect ratings and ticket sales to drop continually.

 

 

Yeah yeah I know....I already admitted to him I was wrong.

 

The second part of your post....I do agree with. Wonder what the philosophy will be for next year.

[WhiskeyBreath]

Retarded.

[NateGrey]

Wait' date=' wait, wait, what was that about littering the boards with crap? That's what you've been doing for months with your accusations. It's crap. Sure, it's your opinion, but that's what places like this are for. Places of discussion. Were you under some other impression? Did you think this was just a repository for your illogical rants? If that's what this place is, I want no part in it. Make a post, take the consequence of what you say, ie accept the rebuttal. The more vitriolic the post, the more you should expect from the response. You and I envision two very different places. I have no desire to experience, nor do I think this is the place of, your mental toilet. I think you should expect to stand by what you say here. If you don't want to, then don't say it.[/quote']

 

 

 

http://media.urbandictionary.com/image/large/internet-24591.jpg