Proud fans of a 128-year old tradition

It is currently Fri Oct 31, 2014 1:16 pm

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 42 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Ramon Vazquez
PostPosted: Sat Dec 13, 2008 6:34 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2008 5:16 pm
Posts: 637
BBF wrote:
Kingston wrote:
You understand that Punto is Minnesota's Starting Shortstop, dont you?


Yes, I understand that. And yet, we got a comparable player, to use in a much lesser role, at a lower price.


Yes, we got an equally crummy player for less money because for the last few years hes been a utilityman instead of a starter, like Punto. And youre telling me this is some sort of bargain. Using this logic, we should carry Zach Duke around on our shoulders because hes just as lousy as Dontrelle Willis but gets paid less.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Ramon Vazquez
PostPosted: Sat Dec 13, 2008 6:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2008 7:01 pm
Posts: 7275
Kingston wrote:
Does anyone find it interesting at all that Mark Loretta, our first choice and the consistently superior player, got 1.25 mil for 1 year?


Granted Vazquez wasnt their 1st choice, and he might not have been the best choice, lets remember he is a better fielder than Loretta and can actually play SS at a respectable level...he was cheap and 2 years isnt that long...

Its going to be tough to sign free agents to Pittsburgh without overpaying for them, and tough finding a starter somewhere else in the majors to play backup to a Pirate

_________________
I say keep the $50 and ban him anyway...

For those jumping ship, we'll keep the bandwagon warm for you...


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Ramon Vazquez
PostPosted: Sat Dec 13, 2008 6:55 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2008 5:16 pm
Posts: 637
You overpay to bring someone of real value to Pittsburgh and you do it because other teams are lining up against you for that player's services. When you bring mediocrity to Pittsburgh, the rule neednt apply because other teams arent banging down that player's door and if you cant get that player theres always another mediocrity to be found.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Ramon Vazquez
PostPosted: Sat Dec 13, 2008 7:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2008 7:01 pm
Posts: 7275
but why bring someone in who wont be here in 2 years when this team is ready to compete?

They filled their need with a decent backup for 2 years...and when this team is ready in 2 years, they'll go out and find that backup INFer thats good when its time...

_________________
I say keep the $50 and ban him anyway...

For those jumping ship, we'll keep the bandwagon warm for you...


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Ramon Vazquez
PostPosted: Sat Dec 13, 2008 7:12 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2008 5:16 pm
Posts: 637
nad69dan wrote:
but why bring someone in who wont be here in 2 years when this team is ready to compete?

They filled their need with a decent backup for 2 years...and when this team is ready in 2 years, they'll go out and find that backup INFer thats good when its time...


Well, youre right about that. This is no great calamity because the next 2 years dont matter. But that doesnt make it a smart move either. Because using that logic, how would it have hurt to simply bring in an Everett type at half the price?


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Ramon Vazquez
PostPosted: Sat Dec 13, 2008 7:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2008 7:01 pm
Posts: 7275
Kingston wrote:
nad69dan wrote:
but why bring someone in who wont be here in 2 years when this team is ready to compete?

They filled their need with a decent backup for 2 years...and when this team is ready in 2 years, they'll go out and find that backup INFer thats good when its time...


Well, youre right about that. This is no great calamity because the next 2 years dont matter. But that doesnt make it a smart move either. Because using that logic, how would it have hurt to simply bring in an Everett type at half the price?


Cuz Adam Everett has never played anything but SS and the team needed a guy who could play the entire infield

_________________
I say keep the $50 and ban him anyway...

For those jumping ship, we'll keep the bandwagon warm for you...


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Ramon Vazquez
PostPosted: Sat Dec 13, 2008 7:29 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2008 5:16 pm
Posts: 637
I just threw Everett's name out there to try and make a point about a level of ability, but ok.

Vazquez is no singular talent. There are other utilitymen out there who could have been had for alot less and it wouldnt have mattered because the next 2 years are meaningless anyway, like you said. And that money might have been put to better use next time we're thinking about paying a few hundred grand over slot, or maybe for that incentive to come to Pittsburgh you guys talk about when a talented young player in the DR is trying decide between signing with us or the Brewers.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Ramon Vazquez
PostPosted: Sat Dec 13, 2008 10:40 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 4:26 pm
Posts: 3006
Jesus, did sisyphus get a new screen name?

Perhaps we should not have any bench guys? I don't get it. It is a meaningless signing. It hurts nothing, and it puts a warm body in a hole that needed filled. Really, $4 mil is too much to spend? Maybe you aren't sisyphus...you're Bobby Nutting's accountant.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Ramon Vazquez
PostPosted: Sat Dec 13, 2008 10:51 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2008 5:16 pm
Posts: 637
Warm bodies come alot cheaper than Vazquez. And around here, that matters.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Ramon Vazquez
PostPosted: Sat Dec 13, 2008 11:10 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 4:26 pm
Posts: 3006
Kingston wrote:
Warm bodies come alot cheaper than Vazquez. And around here, that matters.


Undoubtedly we could get cheaper warm bodies. Luis Rivas will be available. But if $4 mil (over 2 years) is going to prevent us from doing something else- in any facet- then we might as well box up the team and ship it to AAA. I do believe the money is there, and that the difference between what is spent on Vazquez and what would be spent on bench alternatives is not nearly as meaningful as you seem to think. I don't think we are going to not sign next year's draft pick because we signed Vazquez instead of Rivas, in other words.

However, I do think that this might be the start of a trend...last year we signed Gomez for a million bucks early in free agency only to later find guys like Minky available on minor league deals. Again this year, we have jumped on a bench player instead of letting the market play out.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Ramon Vazquez
PostPosted: Sat Dec 13, 2008 11:22 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2008 5:16 pm
Posts: 637
BBF wrote:
Kingston wrote:
Warm bodies come alot cheaper than Vazquez. And around here, that matters.


Undoubtedly we could get cheaper warm bodies. Luis Rivas will be available. But if $4 mil (over 2 years) is going to prevent us from doing something else- in any facet- then we might as well box up the team and ship it to AAA. I do believe the money is there, and that the difference between what is spent on Vazquez and what would be spent on bench alternatives is not nearly as meaningful as you seem to think. I don't think we are going to not sign next year's draft pick because we signed Vazquez instead of Rivas, in other words.

However, I do think that this might be the start of a trend...last year we signed Gomez for a million bucks early in free agency only to later find guys like Minky available on minor league deals. Again this year, we have jumped on a bench player instead of letting the market play out.


I agree with alot of that, especially the idea that the money is there. But also there, lets face it, is a reluctance to spend, at least until this point in time. Its not unheard of, yknow, to lose out on a guy you might really want because of a million or so bucks, our Buccos in particular. Im not talking about Sabathia or Teixeira, just a reasonably priced arm or bat that might actually help.

I also agree with your 2nd paragraph. Be honest now; wouldnt you rather have Aaron Miles for roughly the same money? What was the big rush with Vazquez?? For all the talk over the last few weeks about Loretta or Eckstein, I didnt even know Vazquez WAS a free agent til we signed him.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Ramon Vazquez
PostPosted: Sun Dec 14, 2008 4:22 am 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 2:48 am
Posts: 391
I will be pissed if signing Vazquez to play utilityman means we don't resign Mienkiewitcz.

_________________
"What other businesses do you expect to lose money for your entertainment?"-- UPPMB


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Ramon Vazquez
PostPosted: Sun Dec 14, 2008 10:16 am 
Offline
User avatar
 WWW  YIM  Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 7:24 pm
Posts: 4242
Location: Zelienople, PA
Can Menky play 3b or SS?

Didn't think so.

ZM

_________________
Someone tell Votto... rbis are good


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Ramon Vazquez
PostPosted: Sun Dec 14, 2008 5:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 2:48 am
Posts: 391
Thank you for your smart assed reply to my statement. Stay classy.

I was under the impression that Vazquez was brought in to be a backup IF, at all positions. I am fine with Vazquez coming in to take over Gomez's role, but not Doug's.
Mientkiewicz's importance in the locker room is going to be needed more than ever this year.

_________________
"What other businesses do you expect to lose money for your entertainment?"-- UPPMB


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Ramon Vazquez
PostPosted: Sun Dec 14, 2008 5:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:18 pm
Posts: 5060
Location: Scotch Plains, NJ
omgardd wrote:
Thank you for your smart assed reply to my statement. Stay classy.

I was under the impression that Vazquez was brought in to be a backup IF, at all positions. I am fine with Vazquez coming in to take over Gomez's role, but not Doug's.
Mientkiewicz's importance in the locker room is going to be needed more than ever this year.

Minky's locker room presence does not put more runs on the board. If we really need a locker room presence, someone else can pick up the slack.

_________________
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."
~H. L. Mencken


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Ramon Vazquez
PostPosted: Sun Dec 14, 2008 5:34 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2008 5:16 pm
Posts: 637
Willton wrote:
omgardd wrote:
Thank you for your smart assed reply to my statement. Stay classy.

I was under the impression that Vazquez was brought in to be a backup IF, at all positions. I am fine with Vazquez coming in to take over Gomez's role, but not Doug's.
Mientkiewicz's importance in the locker room is going to be needed more than ever this year.

Minky's locker room presence does not put more runs on the board.


This is true, but its a tough argument to make if his at bats go to Vazquez. :)


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Ramon Vazquez
PostPosted: Sun Dec 14, 2008 5:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 2:48 am
Posts: 391
I would still take Doug's bat over Vazquez's.

It would be nice to see someone pick up Doug's slack in the locker room, but I don't see anyone on this roster that can.

_________________
"What other businesses do you expect to lose money for your entertainment?"-- UPPMB


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Ramon Vazquez
PostPosted: Sun Dec 14, 2008 5:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:18 pm
Posts: 5060
Location: Scotch Plains, NJ
Kingston wrote:
Willton wrote:
omgardd wrote:
Thank you for your smart assed reply to my statement. Stay classy.

I was under the impression that Vazquez was brought in to be a backup IF, at all positions. I am fine with Vazquez coming in to take over Gomez's role, but not Doug's.
Mientkiewicz's importance in the locker room is going to be needed more than ever this year.

Minky's locker room presence does not put more runs on the board.


This is true, but its a tough argument to make if his at bats go to Vazquez. :)

I only speak of Minky's locker room presence, which is worthless. His bat is another story.

_________________
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."
~H. L. Mencken


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Ramon Vazquez
PostPosted: Sun Dec 14, 2008 5:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:18 pm
Posts: 5060
Location: Scotch Plains, NJ
omgardd wrote:
I would still take Doug's bat over Vazquez's.

It would be nice to see someone pick up Doug's slack in the locker room, but I don't see anyone on this roster that can.

That's because it's very difficult to judge character from the standpoint of a fan. You aren't in the locker room, so you have no idea.

_________________
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."
~H. L. Mencken


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Ramon Vazquez
PostPosted: Sun Dec 14, 2008 7:33 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 11:28 pm
Posts: 2170
I think ramon has more pop then mienke has.

_________________
0 straight losing seasons


Top
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 42 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Az Bucco fan, Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], Ralphie, val and 7 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group  
Design By Poker Bandits