Hanley DFA’d

[Kimmi]

I believe they would have kept Hanley if his numbers were better.

 

He put them in a pretty bad position, facing the prospect of having him continue to post replacement level numbers and have the option vest. And another prospect of them limiting his PA's and causing problems in the clubhouse or with the union.

 

That's two significantly bad possibilities against the one good one of him getting hot again.

 

I don't disagree that it was a bad situation, brought on by the vesting option.

 

I still do not agree with the decision to DFA him so early in the season.

[mvp 78]

I don't disagree that it was a bad situation, brought on by the vesting option.

 

I still do not agree with the decision to DFA him so early in the season.

 

It seems that every MLB GM agrees with the decision tho?

[Spudboy]

Maybe he is rehabbinh his hurt pride.

 

I read that he is spending time with his family and is involved in making a movie of some sort.

 

I got this info from his FB page which I had to translate from Spanish. Details were not made available.

[mvp 78]

I read that he is spending time with his family and is involved in making a movie of some sort.

 

I got this info from his FB page which I had to translate from Spanish. Details were not made available.

 

Living the dream.

[Kimmi]

It seems that every MLB GM agrees with the decision tho?

 

Actually, no. Many MLB GMs questioned this move at the time that it happened.

[Bellhorn04]

Actually, no. Many MLB GMs questioned this move at the time that it happened.

 

I think he means because no GM has signed him yet.

[Kimmi]

I think he means because no GM has signed him yet.

 

I got that, but I don't think Hanley's not being signed yet is because other GMs agree that DFAing him was the right move.

[Bellhorn04]

I got that, but I don't think Hanley's not being signed yet is because other GMs agree that DFAing him was the right move.

 

I read some of those comments from other baseball people expressing surprise about the move. What struck me, though, was that none of them made any mention of the vesting option. It was hard to tell if they were even aware of it. And if they were aware of it, why wouldn't that factor into how they viewed the move?

[Kimmi]

I read some of those comments from other baseball people expressing surprise about the move. What struck me, though, was that none of them made any mention of the vesting option. It was hard to tell if they were even aware of it. And if they were aware of it, why wouldn't that factor into how they viewed the move?

 

I would have a hard time believing that they were not aware of the vesting option.

 

I'm not sure why it wasn't mentioned. Maybe because any mention of it would kind of throw Dombrowski under the bus indirectly?

[Bellhorn04]

I would have a hard time believing that they were not aware of the vesting option.

 

I'm not sure why it wasn't mentioned. Maybe because any mention of it would kind of throw Dombrowski under the bus indirectly?

 

Yes, they were probably all lying.

[mvp 78]

I got that, but I don't think Hanley's not being signed yet is because other GMs agree that DFAing him was the right move.

 

So the Sox should have kept him in case he got hot and maybe cost them $20M next year, but the same GM’s think he’s not worth the minimum sitting on their bench?

[Kimmi]

Yes, they were probably all lying.

 

I wouldn't doubt it. LOL

[Kimmi]

So the Sox should have kept him in case he got hot and maybe cost them $20M next year, but the same GM’s think he’s not worth the minimum sitting on their bench?

 

They could have DFA'd Hanley later in the year if he didn't turn things around.

 

And I bet several GMs think Hanley is worth the minimum. That he isn't signed yet doesn't mean the opposite.

[mvp 78]

And I bet several GMs think Hanley is worth the minimum. That he isn't signed yet doesn't mean the opposite.

 

Of course it does.

[notin]

So the Sox should have kept him in case he got hot and maybe cost them $20M next year, but the same GM’s think he’s not worth the minimum sitting on their bench?

 

Maybe he's been refusing those type of offers. ..

[Kimmi]

Pete Abraham

‏Verified account @PeteAbe

1m1 minute ago

 

Lots of variables to consider. But if you're curious:

 

#RedSox with Hanley Ramirez on the roster: 50 games, 5.28 runs, .787 OPS.

 

#RedSox without Ramirez on the roster: 24 games, 4.54 runs, .755 OPS.

[Bellhorn04]

Pete Abraham

‏Verified account @PeteAbe

1m1 minute ago

 

Lots of variables to consider. But if you're curious:

 

#RedSox with Hanley Ramirez on the roster: 50 games, 5.28 runs, .787 OPS.

 

#RedSox without Ramirez on the roster: 24 games, 4.54 runs, .755 OPS.

 

I could spin doctor some answers to this:

 

1) The last 24 games included 4 games each in Houston and Seattle!

1) Our offense started dipping in May, and Hanley was a big part of that!

2) Our offense took a hit when Mookie went on the DL and he doesn't appear to be back to 100% yet!

[cp176]

Of course it does.

 

It would seem that you are likely right. I do still think that there is more to the story. A couple of things seem to be working against him. If you could sign him to the minimum and you still thought that you could, why wouldn't you? Maybe they just don't like the big lovable guy. Whether people want to accept that opinion or not, it still is a possibility. It is also possible that they think from a talent perspective, he just isn't worth carrying. it seems very odd to me for sure. I do think that if he had been hitting he would still be with us.

[Bellhorn04]

It's also possible that Hanley's agent has gotten a call or two but that Hanley wasn't interested in that particular team. He's going to collect 22 million whether he's playing or at home, so you can understand why he might not just jump at any opportunity.

[jacksonianmarch]

I could spin doctor some answers to this:

 

1) The last 24 games included 4 games each in Houston and Seattle!

1) Our offense started dipping in May, and Hanley was a big part of that!

2) Our offense took a hit when Mookie went on the DL and he doesn't appear to be back to 100% yet!

 

 

Mookie isn’t back to 100% or he’s not back to space alien in Space Jam after stealing all star power yet? Mookie’s start was unsustainable.

[Natick to NC]

If Dave and Hanley have an agreement to come back to be a part time player I'm all for it .I also think Hanley may excel in that role .

[Bellhorn04]

Mookie isn’t back to 100% or he’s not back to space alien in Space Jam after stealing all star power yet? Mookie’s start was unsustainable.

 

That's true, but the oblique may still be bothering him.

[Station 13]

Pete Abraham

‏Verified account @PeteAbe

1m1 minute ago

 

Lots of variables to consider. But if you're curious:

 

#RedSox with Hanley Ramirez on the roster: 50 games, 5.28 runs, .787 OPS.

 

#RedSox without Ramirez on the roster: 24 games, 4.54 runs, .755 OPS.

 

Hanley OPS .708

PeteAbe is a moron.

[cp176]

It's also possible that Hanley's agent has gotten a call or two but that Hanley wasn't interested in that particular team. He's going to collect 22 million whether he's playing or at home, so you can understand why he might not just jump at any opportunity.

 

It is possible I agree. No one knows the whole story. We just make what we think are good guesses. I hope he is happy and that we never get the whole story if there even is one. I do have a little problem though understanding how a professional baseball player might not be interested in "jumping " right back into it regardless of how much money they might be making. It is what he has always done. It has been his life. Good luck to him.

[moonslav59]

If Dave and Hanley have an agreement to come back to be a part time player I'm all for it .I also think Hanley may excel in that role .

 

At this point, we could bring him back as a FT'er and he still wouldn't vest.

[Bellhorn04]

At this point, we could bring him back as a FT'er and he still wouldn't vest.

 

I think your math is a little iffy. He needed 302 more PA's and there are 87 games left.

[moonslav59]

I think your math is a little iffy. He needed 302 more PA's and there are 87 games left.

 

He played in 44 games with us and got 177 PAs.

 

If he played in all 87 games (highly unlikely even if "fulltime"), he get about 350 PAs. Yes, that would put him over, but in reality, I'm looking at these aspects:

 

1) He'd have to take a few games in AAA to get back into form.

2) He reportedly rehabbing an injury as we speak.

3) When he gave us those 44 games, it was over our first 50 games. That's 88%. Even if he was signed and added to the ML roster today, and played at the same rate as pre-DFA, he'd only play in about 76 games. In reality, it might be more like 70 tops. At 4.43 PAs per game (pre-DFA rate), he's get about 310 PAs. At less than 68 games played, he'd be under.

 

In reality, you are right. If he started tomorrow and played at his previous rate, he vest by a few PAs.

 

Anyways, it's not happening.

[Natick to NC]

I think it's unlikely but I wouldn't shocked or unhappy one bit if he was to come back next Friday .

[Kimmi]

I could spin doctor some answers to this:

 

1) The last 24 games included 4 games each in Houston and Seattle!

1) Our offense started dipping in May, and Hanley was a big part of that!

2) Our offense took a hit when Mookie went on the DL and he doesn't appear to be back to 100% yet!

 

LOL I actually don't think you are spin doctoring this. As PA pointed out, there are lots of variables to consider, including the ones that you've mentioned.

[Kimmi]

It's also possible that Hanley's agent has gotten a call or two but that Hanley wasn't interested in that particular team. He's going to collect 22 million whether he's playing or at home, so you can understand why he might not just jump at any opportunity.

 

Especially if those calls are from teams like the Orioles or the Tigers.

 

I wouldn't be surprised is Hanley is soured by this whole situation and just wants some time away from baseball.