Dan Gould Posted August 13, 2008 Report Posted August 13, 2008 Right-side oblique strain will heal quicker for a righty than a left-side oblique strain. If it's the right, that is good news. If he has to be DL'd, fahk Lugo, I'd much rather see them stay with Lowrie at SS and move Youk to 3B and see what Chris Carter has to offer at 1B. I'm willing to believe there's slightly faster healing but you can't tell me that its not just like any other oblique strain: there's a decent chance of it lingering, and its easy to re-injure if you come back too soon. And, I was talking about Lugo in September when he returns. There's no doubt that Youk will play 3B except that I am sure they'll put Lowrie there occasionally whenever they face a tough lefty that Casey is likely to have trouble with. Quote
tkeith Posted August 13, 2008 Report Posted August 13, 2008 Right-side oblique strain will heal quicker for a righty than a left-side oblique strain. If it's the right, that is good news. If he has to be DL'd, fahk Lugo, I'd much rather see them stay with Lowrie at SS and move Youk to 3B and see what Chris Carter has to offer at 1B. I'm willing to believe there's slightly faster healing but you can't tell me that its not just like any other oblique strain: there's a decent chance of it lingering, and its easy to re-injure if you come back too soon. And, I was talking about Lugo in September when he returns. There's no doubt that Youk will play 3B except that I am sure they'll put Lowrie there occasionally whenever they face a tough lefty that Casey is likely to have trouble with. Still like to see what Carter can do -- like to see what we got for Bronson Arroyo. Oblique strains are tricky, but for the right-handed hitter/thrower, your exerting greater strain on the front side (hitting) of the torso than the back side. Also, throwing, even though the motion is on the right side, your left side expands and contracts (like crunch) more with the act of throwing. Both are serious and may linger, but the left-side requires much more care (time) be taken with a comeback. If it's a mild strain, he could easily return to active duty in 7-10 days; if it's severe, more like 2-3 weeks (for an athlete; stiffs like us would be useless at least 2-3 weeks! ) Quote
PHILLYQ Posted August 14, 2008 Report Posted August 14, 2008 It looks very likely to me that the Yankees won't make the playoffs- the pitching is just too thin(I told this to a friend of mine a month ago and he scoffed). It's also POSSIBLE, if the Chisox & Twins play well and Tampa Bay stays on course, that the Bosox will also be on the outside looking in come October. Both 'Evil Empires' down? Quote
tkeith Posted August 14, 2008 Report Posted August 14, 2008 Both 'Evil Empires' down? Not gonna happen. Quote
Tom in RI Posted August 14, 2008 Report Posted August 14, 2008 Thom, I have seen Chris Carter several times this year in Pawtucket. He has had a pretty good season offensively but he is not a major league 1st baseman, hasn't looked to good in left field either. Quote
Tom in RI Posted August 14, 2008 Report Posted August 14, 2008 Additionally, it appears Carter may be injured as he hasn't played since August 7th, Joe Thurston, who has also had a very good year in triple A, has assumed left field in the meantime. Quote
Chuck Nessa Posted August 14, 2008 Report Posted August 14, 2008 In another league, Cubs win 2. Quote
tkeith Posted August 14, 2008 Report Posted August 14, 2008 Thom, I have seen Chris Carter several times this year in Pawtucket. He has had a pretty good season offensively but he is not a major league 1st baseman, hasn't looked to good in left field either. Moot point. Pauley optioned, Jeff Bailey recalled. Quote
Dan Gould Posted August 14, 2008 Report Posted August 14, 2008 Thom, I have seen Chris Carter several times this year in Pawtucket. He has had a pretty good season offensively but he is not a major league 1st baseman, hasn't looked to good in left field either. Moot point. Pauley optioned, Jeff Bailey recalled. And Bailey will be sent away so that Byrd can start on Friday. (Or was there a roster move I wasn't aware of - I was kind of surprised to see Byrd in the dugout, I thought there were rules about guys in uniform in the dugout for games when they aren't on the roster yet.) In the meantime, it was a great thing to have a starter more than capable of shutting down a great offense, and fortunately the lead was large enough that even Timlin couldn't flush it away. But for this team to do anything, they have to start using Masterson properly, kind of like they did tonight. When you've got no options for setup relief except maybe Okajima on a very short leash, you got to turn to your best option, Masterson, and use him like a regular reliever. No more of these 2+ inning appearances. Get him used to going one inning at least two and sometimes three times in a row. Quote
Big Al Posted August 14, 2008 Report Posted August 14, 2008 The Rangers have not won a game at Fenway since last season. I smell another sweep around the corner. The announcer said something like the Rangers are 12-37 against the Red Sox in the last few years (I forget how many; I'm sure Dan will know). Quote
Tim McG Posted August 14, 2008 Author Report Posted August 14, 2008 In another league, Cubs win 2. No. In the Important League, Chuck. AKA; The Senior Curcuit. Go NL. Quote
Quincy Posted August 14, 2008 Report Posted August 14, 2008 In another league, Cubs win 2. On the road! By a combined score of 18-2. Piniella managing vs. his hometown & a Tampa team that he bailed on would be so wunnerfull. Uh, never mind that thing about the Cubs not being in a World Series in awhile. Quote
Big Al Posted August 14, 2008 Report Posted August 14, 2008 In another league, Cubs win 2. CUBS WIN! CUBS WIN! TWICE IN ONE DAY! HOLY COW!!!! Somewhere, I gotta believe that Harry & Skip are throwing down some brewskis (Budweisers, probably, since Harry was a "Bud Man and a Cub Fan") & arguing with each other during this series. Quote
Dan Gould Posted August 14, 2008 Report Posted August 14, 2008 The Rangers have not won a game at Fenway since last season. I smell another sweep around the corner. The announcer said something like the Rangers are 12-37 against the Red Sox in the last few years (I forget how many; I'm sure Dan will know). Don't know the Rangers mark against the Sox (I've taken more notice of their futility against the Yanks ) and you may be right about a sweep, particularly with Hamilton visiting his newborn child, and a replacement starter going. On the other hand, while Dice-K can probably do a good job against their bats, the Rangers have to know that he typically doesn't go deep into his games because of the way he nibbles. If they get him out of there and get a chance against the pathetic bullpen, I think they've got a good chance to get out of town with a win. If Dice goes seven or seven+, then yeah, we'll probably get the sweep. Quote
jlhoots Posted August 14, 2008 Report Posted August 14, 2008 In another league, Cubs win 2. Brewers only won one game yesterday. Sabathia remains undefeated since joining Brewers. Quote
zen archer Posted August 14, 2008 Report Posted August 14, 2008 In another league, Cubs win 2. Brewers only won one game yesterday. Sabathia remains undefeated since joining Brewers. Sabathia is a free agent at the end of the season ?.....look for the Sox and Yanks to go nuts bidding for him. Quote
Soulstation1 Posted August 14, 2008 Report Posted August 14, 2008 we're outta last place :party: :party: :party: :party: :party: :party: :party: :party: Quote
Dan Gould Posted August 14, 2008 Report Posted August 14, 2008 In another league, Cubs win 2. Brewers only won one game yesterday. Sabathia remains undefeated since joining Brewers. Sabathia is a free agent at the end of the season ?.....look for the Sox and Yanks to go nuts bidding for him. I don't know - I think that you have to have some concern about his girth and his long-term health, especially since he will likely demand a ridiculously long contract. I think he's likely to be an effective pitcher for a while yet, but its a lot of money for a guy who could have his knees give out anytime. Plus, I have to wonder if he looks at the NL and thinks that he's got a chance to dominate, much more than he ever dominated the AL. And I think he enjoys taking his hacks, too. Quote
tkeith Posted August 14, 2008 Report Posted August 14, 2008 I don't know - I think that you have to have some concern about his girth and his long-term health, especially since he will likely demand a ridiculously long contract. I think he's likely to be an effective pitcher for a while yet, but its a lot of money for a guy who could have his knees give out anytime. Plus, I have to wonder if he looks at the NL and thinks that he's got a chance to dominate, much more than he ever dominated the AL. And I think he enjoys taking his hacks, too. What NL team can afford him? He'll be a Skank... count on it. Quote
Dan Gould Posted August 14, 2008 Report Posted August 14, 2008 I don't know - I think that you have to have some concern about his girth and his long-term health, especially since he will likely demand a ridiculously long contract. I think he's likely to be an effective pitcher for a while yet, but its a lot of money for a guy who could have his knees give out anytime. Plus, I have to wonder if he looks at the NL and thinks that he's got a chance to dominate, much more than he ever dominated the AL. And I think he enjoys taking his hacks, too. What NL team can afford him? He'll be a Skank... count on it. With the revenue and new Met ticket prices for the new stadium, they'd have no trouble using him to replace Pedro. I've also heard that he won't hold out for the last dollar, so its quite possible he doesn't just fleece the Yankees into a stupid contract. Quote
Chalupa Posted August 14, 2008 Report Posted August 14, 2008 Well I guess JRoll really wants out of Philly.... http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/Frontr...rs_Who_You.html Quote
papsrus Posted August 14, 2008 Report Posted August 14, 2008 Dan -- or anyone: WFT is the deal with the wavier wire? I know basically that every team ahead of you in the standings has a shot to block you from picking up a player, and I know that virtually every team throws a list of players out there for a variety of reasons. But how do the BoSox, for instance, block the Rays from picking up ANY AND ALL players floating around out there that they might be interested in? Wouldn't the Sox end up with a half dozen players they don't really want? ... not quite getting it ... Quote
Dan Gould Posted August 14, 2008 Report Posted August 14, 2008 Dan -- or anyone: WFT is the deal with the wavier wire? I know basically that every team ahead of you in the standings has a shot to block you from picking up a player, and I know that virtually every team throws a list of players out there for a variety of reasons. But how do the BoSox, for instance, block the Rays from picking up ANY AND ALL players floating around out there that they might be interested in? Wouldn't the Sox end up with a half dozen players they don't really want? ... not quite getting it ... I've recently seen a link to a straightforward description of the process, but basically, teams put players on revocable waivers. So the player is offered to each team in the same league, from worst to best record, then the process is repeated in the other league (pretty sure they do it by leagues, not overall record). So with one of the best records, the Rays are in a tougher spot than say the Yanks or Red Sox. But once someone is claimed, the two teams have 48 hours to negotiate a deal. If they don't, the player stays with his original team and he can't be put through waivers again for the rest of the season. So the waivers aren't irrevocable because the team that has his rights can pull him back - if they really wanted to trade him to a particular team and someone makes a blocking maneuver, they can simply pull him back and not even bother with the 48 hour negotiating window. The only way the Sox would end up with a bunch of players they don't really want is if their teams chose to simply let them have the players they put a claim on. That's a straight salary dump and for a long time rarely happened. Then the Reds took their "nasty boy" relievers (Charlton?), put them on waivers, and when a claim was made, didn't pull them back, leaving the team that didn't really want him stuck with his remaining salary. Supposedly when Canseco spent the last couple of months of the 2000 season with the Yankees, that was a deal where the Yanks put in a claim to block Canseco and ended up stuck with him. So that's the risk that you run, but its still pretty rare. Most teams put guys on waivers but will pull them back if someone claims them. Quote
papsrus Posted August 14, 2008 Report Posted August 14, 2008 Dan -- or anyone: WFT is the deal with the wavier wire? I know basically that every team ahead of you in the standings has a shot to block you from picking up a player, and I know that virtually every team throws a list of players out there for a variety of reasons. But how do the BoSox, for instance, block the Rays from picking up ANY AND ALL players floating around out there that they might be interested in? Wouldn't the Sox end up with a half dozen players they don't really want? ... not quite getting it ... I've recently seen a link to a straightforward description of the process, but basically, teams put players on revocable waivers. So the player is offered to each team in the same league, from worst to best record, then the process is repeated in the other league (pretty sure they do it by leagues, not overall record). So with one of the best records, the Rays are in a tougher spot than say the Yanks or Red Sox. But once someone is claimed, the two teams have 48 hours to negotiate a deal. If they don't, the player stays with his original team and he can't be put through waivers again for the rest of the season. So the waivers aren't irrevocable because the team that has his rights can pull him back - if they really wanted to trade him to a particular team and someone makes a blocking maneuver, they can simply pull him back and not even bother with the 48 hour negotiating window. The only way the Sox would end up with a bunch of players they don't really want is if their teams chose to simply let them have the players they put a claim on. That's a straight salary dump and for a long time rarely happened. Then the Reds took their "nasty boy" relievers (Charlton?), put them on waivers, and when a claim was made, didn't pull them back, leaving the team that didn't really want him stuck with his remaining salary. Supposedly when Canseco spent the last couple of months of the 2000 season with the Yankees, that was a deal where the Yanks put in a claim to block Canseco and ended up stuck with him. So that's the risk that you run, but its still pretty rare. Most teams put guys on waivers but will pull them back if someone claims them. Thanks Dan. It would be nice if this "blocking" tactic was somehow eliminated -- or at least mitigated. For instance, you could allow a team to block once, then allow the other team to put their player back on waivers a second time for a limited time. Something like that. But then again, maybe the league wants this. ... Or maybe the union would be opposed. Anyways, looks like the Rays won't be able to pick up anyone. Their own fault for not making a move before the deadline, I suppose. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.