Hanley DFA’d

[mvp 78]

No offense but I prefer a more authoritative source than "we.":)

 

Perhaps the Red Sox contracts specifically extinguishes the vesting option if the club releases Hanley Ramirez.

 

Or not.

 

I guess Alex Speier and others who talk directly to ownership aren't good sources?

[mvp 78]

the Bridgewater triangle??? Like to see that one - be down there Sunday !

 

https://www.lastpodcastontheleft.com/episodes/2017/12/30/episode-114-the-bridgewater-triangle

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridgewater_Triangle

 

https://roadtrippers.com/trips/15922081

[harmony]

I guess Alex Speier and others who talk directly to ownership aren't good sources?

I hold Alex Speier in high regard but would prefer that he cite the specific provision that extinguishes the vesting option instead of reporting a mere conclusion.

[cp176]

https://www.lastpodcastontheleft.com/episodes/2017/12/30/episode-114-the-bridgewater-triangle

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridgewater_Triangle

 

https://roadtrippers.com/trips/15922081

 

cool - thank you MVP. I am particularly interested in having the opportunity to spot a bigfoot. I'll let you know how the search goes.

[Bellhorn04]

I hold Alex Speier in high regard but would prefer that he cite the specific provision that extinguishes the vesting option instead of reporting a mere conclusion.

 

Sometimes you just have to exercise a little common sense.

 

No team is going to agree to a vesting option that they can be potentially liable for even after the player leaves their employment and the team can no longer control the playing time or whatever it is that triggers the option.

[jad]

Sometimes you just have to exercise a little common sense.

 

No team is going to agree to a vesting option that they can be potentially liable for even after the player leaves their employment and the team can no longer control the playing time or whatever it is that triggers the option.

 

By the same token, no team is going to be stupid enough to sign a fat, out-of-shape 3baseman for 100million dollars. Nor are they going to sign a Cuban outfielder for 70 million who has never seen a major league curve ball. Nor give 80 million to an aging shortstop who they will then put in left field. Baseball GMs are just way too smart to do anything like that.

[Bellhorn04]

By the same token, no team is going to be stupid enough to sign a fat, out-of-shape 3baseman for 100million dollars. Nor are they going to sign a Cuban outfielder for 70 million who has never seen a major league curve ball. Nor give 80 million to an aging shortstop who they will then put in left field. Baseball GMs are just way too smart to do anything like that.

 

Apples and oranges, obviously.

[notin]

By the same token, no team is going to be stupid enough to sign a fat, out-of-shape 3baseman for 100million dollars. Nor are they going to sign a Cuban outfielder for 70 million who has never seen a major league curve ball. Nor give 80 million to an aging shortstop who they will then put in left field. Baseball GMs are just way too smart to do anything like that.

 

If they gave that $70mill to Jose Abreu and his zero plate appearances against an MLB curve ball, would that have been so bad?

[mvp 78]

I hold Alex Speier in high regard but would prefer that he cite the specific provision that extinguishes the vesting option instead of reporting a mere conclusion.

 

LOL, I don’t think you’re getting a pdf of the contract you goober.

[Kimmi]

I refuse to believe a 22 million vesting option didn't have SOMETHING to do with it (combined with some very lackluster numbers after a promising start).

 

The vesting option had pretty much everything to do with it. If there were no vesting option, Hanley would still be on the team.

[Kimmi]

There is absolutely no disparagement in the comments you quoted.

 

Cora and Dombrowski stated that they didn't think Hanley would 'sit well'. There's a negative implication to that, IMO. Either way, why not just say that they didn't think they'd be able to find enough at bats for Hanley, and leave it at that? There is no reason to talk about how they thought he wouldn't handle it well, outside of trying to cover their own butts.

[Bellhorn04]

Cora and Dombrowski stated that they didn't think Hanley would 'sit well'. There's a negative implication to that, IMO. Either way, why not just say that they didn't think they'd be able to find enough at bats for Hanley, and leave it at that? There is no reason to talk about how they thought he wouldn't handle it well, outside of trying to cover their own butts.

 

I thought Cora's comments were meant to be baseball-related, that a bench role could be adverse to Hanley's play. As someone else said it's similar to the idea that being a DH only and not playing the field has an adverse effect for some.

 

Or maybe his comments are subject to interpretation.

 

Maybe he said too much, trying to explain it too much.

 

Hard to say. But I can't see Alex Cora intentionally discrediting Hanley's character.

[Spudboy]

LOL, I don’t think you’re getting a pdf of the contract you goober.

 

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!1!!1

[SoxHop]

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!1!!1

 

ahahah..... that cracked me up too...

[Bellhorn04]

That was a show-stopper.

[Spudboy]

Cora and Dombrowski stated that they didn't think Hanley would 'sit well'. There's a negative implication to that, IMO. Either way, why not just say that they didn't think they'd be able to find enough at bats for Hanley, and leave it at that? There is no reason to talk about how they thought he wouldn't handle it well, outside of trying to cover their own butts.

 

Yes. Overall, DD and Cora conspired to handle this very poorly.

 

I raged on Hanley calling him a sloth. Mostly unjustified.

 

I am all but certain that he will be signed within the next week and I will be pulling for him to rake and to be happy. I am one of the few here that firmly believes that while he will never be a 30/30 guy or even bat .300 in a full season, he still has enough left in the tank to justify a roster spot. Plenty of teams know this and will be willing to pick-up an impact bat.

 

The guy is still a dangerous hitter, and really, not such a bad 1st baseman either.

Edited May 31, 2018 by Spudboy

[Spudboy]

I thought Cora's comments were meant to be baseball-related, that a bench role could be adverse to Hanley's play. As someone else said it's similar to the idea that being a DH only and not playing the field has an adverse effect for some.

 

Or maybe his comments are subject to interpretation.

 

Maybe he said too much, trying to explain it too much.

 

Hard to say. But I can't see Alex Cora intentionally discrediting Hanley's character.

 

Or not.

 

Seriously, neither Cora or his handled this the way we would expect. No way Cora was dissing Hanley. DD just said too much and Cora is not exactly a wordsmith.

[harmony]

LOL, I don’t think you’re getting a pdf of the contract you goober.

:D

 

The world is full of people who believe everything reported in the media.

[Spudboy]

The world is also full of people that believe everything they read on websites.

[harmony]

The world is also full of people that believe everything they read on websites.

And other people question.

 

Such as an attorney. Or a former newspaper journalist. Or a former journalism professor.

[SoxHop]

And other people question.

 

Such as an attorney. Or a former newspaper journalist. Or a former journalism professor.

 

I hope they take this to Judge Judy.

[cp176]

The vesting option had pretty much everything to do with it. If there were no vesting option, Hanley would still be on the team.

 

The vesting option certainly had something to do with it but not everything. Other factors compounded by the vesting option I think. Anyone who truly claims that they know otherwise is just stating an opinion. I'm still going to believe that if he been hitting he would still be here. He wasn't and he is gone.

[kenmeister]

The vesting option certainly had something to do with it but not everything. Other factors compounded by the vesting option I think. Anyone who truly claims that they know otherwise is just stating an opinion. I'm still going to believe that if he been hitting he would still be here. He wasn't and he is gone.

 

There really became no reason to play him over Moreland at first. Moreland has better defense and offense at this point. So that leaves DH. Well, with JBJ starting to pull his weight again, JDM will see the bulk of his play at DH, so Ramirez became obsolete. Of course now Betts has missed a bunch of games and we could have used Ramirez, but that's the way it goes.

[notin]

The vesting option certainly had something to do with it but not everything. Other factors compounded by the vesting option I think. Anyone who truly claims that they know otherwise is just stating an opinion. I'm still going to believe that if he been hitting he would still be here. He wasn't and he is gone.

 

I'm not so sure.

 

Cora was batting him third most of the year and second in his last game. If hitting as the issue, why wasn't he ever dropped down in the lineup?

[harmony]

As suggested, has Bellhorn04 emailed Alex Speier regarding the status of the vesting option?

 

I've emailed the Wasserman agency that represents Hanley Ramirez but don't anticipate a response.

[a700hitter]

Cora and Dombrowski stated that they didn't think Hanley would 'sit well'. There's a negative implication to that, IMO. Either way, why not just say that they didn't think they'd be able to find enough at bats for Hanley, and leave it at that? There is no reason to talk about how they thought he wouldn't handle it well, outside of trying to cover their own butts.

That is not disparagement. They didn't think he would like a part time role, because he has always been a full time player, and they thought he is not suited to a part time role. They didn't state that they were worried about him becoming a clubhouse problem. That is projection by you.

[a700hitter]

LOL, I don’t think you’re getting a pdf of the contract you goober.

You would think that this would put to an end the stupid trolling of this issue.

[cp176]

I'm not so sure.

 

Cora was batting him third most of the year and second in his last game. If hitting as the issue, why wasn't he ever dropped down in the lineup?

 

I'm not sure that moving him to the 2 spot in the lineup was intended to prove or show us anything. I don't take that move as evidence that his release was solely because of his vesting option. Maybe their decision had already kind of been made. I don't know but I don't ever read too much into these types of things. If someone thinks that the vesting option was the absolute only opinion that he was released, so be it. I would like to know how they know this. The overall sentiment seems to be that it was a good decision and I guess that that is really all that matters.

[Bellhorn04]

As suggested, has Bellhorn04 emailed Alex Speier regarding the status of the vesting option?

 

I've emailed the Wasserman agency that represents Hanley Ramirez but don't anticipate a response.

 

I did email Alex but no reply.

[Jack Flap]

Harmony seems to be just about the only person who finds this issue so mystifying.