Dojji

I don't get why challenging me on the Navarro question has become a "thing" for you in particular Yaz. What I'm proposing is really not that absurd, and Navarro's ability to play ball in the big leagues is being way underrated here. In terms of readiness, he'd be a little raw and rushed if he was called up now, but he has enough talent that he could pull through a rough inifial couple months and settle in. Jumping pretty much straight from AA to the majors would be rocky for him, but it really depends on the level of expectations. If they're reasonable for a rookie who's learning on the job (replacement level or better), he can probably meet them. If they're the standards of a major contender looking for real run production from the shortstop position, the only guy we have who has a real chance to meet that standard is Jed Lowrie (Scutaro is more a really, really good utility man on a championship team or a starter on an average to above average one). Little doubt he'd benefit from some extra time in the minors, if he debuted now his frist year wouldn't reflect his ultimate talent level, but this kid isn't a bit prospect either. He's quite underrated and shows potential in at least 4 of the 5 tools (power is a work in progress, but he's a good gap hitter). Navarro's worst sin is to be behind two guys in Iglesias and Lowrie who are far more immediate, that doesn't, or at least shouldn't, take away from our impressions of his own talent, which is non-trivial. A number of teams if they had a Navarro would debut him by midseason next year for the glove and hope the bat caught up, a lot of good shortstops began their careers that way. So if you wanted to demand that I commit to the idea that Navarro could be a starter, I'll go ahead and say it: On a small market, one that's bringing a youth movement forward and trying guys out to see whether they can get the job done, Navarro could absolutely be a starter. He could start on a bigger market that had a hole at his position as well. Just his bad luck, he's coming up in our deepest field position at the high minors level so he probably won't get much of a look this year. That has nothing to do with what he's capable of, just what opportunities he's likely to recieve.

He'd be a "starting shortstop" like Kevin Cash was a starting catcher this year. Not in terms of quality, in terms of role. My only point was that if you needed a guy for several consecutive starts and Navarro was all you had, you could do a lot worse. Nor should we pretend we've never been that far down on the depth chart. We've been that deep in catcher nearly as often as not since 2006 and in shortstop in 2009. There's no real reason to play Navarro down. In all likelihood we don't see him at all but that doesn't mean he can't be effective. I'm just saying that if we do need to see him, his chances of being replacement level or better are fair.

To be useful to his team. Either as a player or as a trading piece. A lot of teams are desperate for good young shortstops not just this year but every year. Navarro's ability to play SS well with good range and a strong arm combined with a .750-.800 OPS bat in the minors makes him a good dark horse candidate to become a starting SS for someone, meaning he's a guy you could possiby either trade for a reliever or work in as the second piece in a bigger deal for an impact bat with, say, the Padres, who could use a young, talented SS right about now. Basically he's put himself in a range of performance this year where a GM would look at him and say "Hey, this guy could help me." Whether that GM is Theo or a trading partner doesn't really matter.

Oh, and I do believe I also mentioned Iglesias in that OP that everyone loves to misquote. So if you want to play the national sport, at least get it somewhere in the same continent as accurate. Depth chart at shortstop Scutaro/Lowrie Lowrie/Scutaro Iglesias Navarro We go that deep in shortstops and projectable shortstop prospects. That's actually really good -- but just because you'd rather see Iglesias or Lowrie (and so would I) it doesn't do to dismiss the achievements of a guy like Navarro who's put himself in a very good position despite being a lot less heralded.

Because all I was hearing was about how much he sucked and how much he wasn't even an option. At his stage of development that's a ridiculous position to take. If he holds on his current vector, he'll be ready by the break next year or by 2012 at the latest. Can that change if he does poorly next year? Absolutely, but that's true of every prospect anywhere and so is just something you say when you want to sound smart rather than a meaningful contribution to the conversation. And judging a guy based on his first handful of at bats in the bigs, especially on the basis of irregular playing time, is just silly. In this case his minor league stats are a much better indicator of what you can expect out of them even if they aren't a 1-for-1 translation. I don't think this guy is ever going to be a superstar hitter but the potential is there to be average and he's closer to that potential than you guys are ever going to give him credit for.

I mentioned Lowrie first and considering I've actively campaigned for Lowrie to be the starter even over a healthy Scutaro next year, I didn't think that in context i'd have to mince words like a Congressman in mid-scandal in order to get my point across properly about who I'd like to see playing in which order.

"repeatedly, avidly misquoted for the amusement of others" is the term I'd use for it. I never said Navarro was a guy I wanted in the majors next year. Merely that he was a legitimate option if the worst case scenario happens and Scutaro and Lowrie both go down. That sound like "Plan B" to you? It's not any guy I'd ever want as my option as soon as the starter goes down. I don't think I ever called Navarro plan B. I did call him Plan C, which is a whole nother animal. A Plan C player generally is not on a given MLB roster, but from where Navarro will be in AAA, he's a good season offensively away from projecting very nicely as a solid respectable shortstop. Not going to break any offensive records, no, but then I never said he was -- just that he should hit enough to meet the very low standards of tolerable shortstop offense once he gets his feet in the bigs. No one would be foolish enough to project Derek Jeter out of the guy, but he's got the range and arm to be a defensive guy and enough hints of a bat that he could wind up as more, that's all. I don't think it's fair to project Navarro as conservatively as he's being projected here, especially since the judgments are being made based on the first 40 at the moment. The fact is that there is some very positive projectability there. Pointing that out is not optimistic. It is realistic. And Navarro being able to come up sometime at the mid point of next year is not that unrealistic or optimistic either. He has to hit of course but that's true of every prospect, and Navarro made some progress in that arena this year that I'm looking forward to seeing if he can sustain. So ultimately all I'm saying here is that the team rushing a guy up maybe half a year to a year early if we get a situation like we encountered in 2009 and seeing if Navarro could hold down the job is something that could happen before the team decides to go outside the org looking for a warm body. That's not even all that optimistic at all, for pity's sake it's a literal expressed concern about the health of two different shortstops that I even brought it up.

Don't care, I'm just glad we have both of them.

You realize that Ortiz has had his best offensive year since his 2007 heyday right? His power is way better this year than last. Give the man credit where it's due. It's not like big guys all get lost when they tun 35. Frank Thomas kept playing intio his 40's and Jim Thome is still rattling around for what that's worth.

Ortiz going to NYY would add another 5-6 HR's a year. That park is built for guys like him.

If there were ever two teams that could take the long track with a pitcher, it'd be the Red Sox and the Yankees.

Right move, wrong reason. If Lowell was hitting .750 with 10 HR's he still shouldn't be batting now. Give the experience to the guys who are going to be in the system next yr.

We're going to be letting Lowell's money off the books, and possibly Ortiz's. Between the two we'll have no trouble affording Dunn and V-Mart.

Congrats on a solid career, Mike. And thanks for your career year in 2007.

Well, what brought this up is that I thought he'd be an acceptable replacement if we needed one should Scutaro and Lowrie can't get the job done because of health. I agree he shouldn't be Plan A next year but you could do a lot worse than him as Plan C.

I just don't think he's that far off. The guy had a good year in AA and was off to a good start in AAA. No one will mistake him for Troy Tulowitzki, but Paul Janish is hardly too much to ask and that's a pretty good shorstop. He's been better and younger than Janish most of the way through his minor league career. He'd be better off with at least a little more time in the minors but there's no particular reason to be down on the guy going forward and no reason we couldn't use him on at least an emergency basis this coming season.

http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j186/DonaldDouglas/Americaneocon/46166227-1.jpg Just saying... It could have been worse.

Nothing I said in that post was something I hadn't said before in this thread other than possibly the MLE's. I put a fair bit of research into this discussion in order to defend my point, all you did was express doubt and put words in my mouth in a lame attempt to save face. And you're still at it. This is as far as it goes for me, but I really am disappointed.

So your rational response to the points I raised amounts to nothing more than the bronx salute. *sigh* I was hoping you'd actually put some thought and research into a position before you call someone else crazy for disagreeing with it. Ahh well, that's just me, I guess. Always much too optimistic.

*sigh* Could you try not to be so predictable? I was hoping for a conversation, not a numb repetition of tired old sports forum cliches. I have given plenty of reasons why Navarro is a viable option. He has strong tools, has performed well in the upper minors between AA and AAA, has demonstrated good gap power and OBP, and the standards for his offense at short are low enough to meet even if there are rough patches. Now we spoiled Red Sox fans who are used to offensive juggernauts in every position may have an issue with a guy with a .260/.320/.380 line, which is about his MLE's, but it's actually average or slightly above among big league shortstops. There's a lot of guys who are out there for a combination of a good glove and "veteranosity." So he might not be good enough to please the offensive purists, but he is "viable" as near as I can determine, especially if he gets consistent AB's. Not that it wouldn't be at least a bit of a rush job, but only really by half a season or so.

Testy are we? Look, if you don't want to back up your statement fine, we'll leave it at that, I'm just curious how deep you'll dig before you realize the goal is to get OUT of the hole.

And now many of these people have you not called an idiot sometime in the last 12 months? Just curious about this one. We'll get to the point of whether you might actually deign to furnish a link sometime between now and Armageddon later.

I'm beginning to wonder whether you are. You made the allegation, come up with the evidence. Or, you know, shut up, either one works for me.

Alright then, what serious, actual baseball mind, credited and listened to by actual rational people, has been calling Ellsbury's attitude into question? And quit the attempted pissing contest. Not playing. If you want to back off and admit you're wrong, fine, but turning this into something where we both spend days saying "no, YOUR mom" is just idiotic.