millz58 Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 I don't know if I like the idea of him for a year (or a few months), but he wouldn't be a horrible DH. http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/vlad-guerreros-best-bet-could-be-baltimore-orioles-012711 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papasmurfbell Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 All he can do is DH. He also doesn't want to be here. Would he be a good roll model in the club house collecting a check and being unhappy being here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
millz58 Posted January 28, 2011 Author Share Posted January 28, 2011 If/when he finds out no one else wants him, he can take this offer, eat it with humble pie and wash it down with a cool glass of STFU, then step up for the best 400-500 ABs a guy his age can give us in a hitter's park. Or he can leave the game. That's all that matters concerning him IMO. I don't have a problem with our team having a designated designated hitter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thundercleetz Posted January 29, 2011 Share Posted January 29, 2011 All he can do is DH. He also doesn't want to be here. Would he be a good roll model in the club house collecting a check and being unhappy being here. Is that really anything worse than what we have had here the past 13 seasons? At this point I'm hardly worried about a guy coming in and being a bad role model. If Vlad give us his production from last season and helps us play above .500 baseball, he can do whatever he wants in the clubhouse and I'll still be thrilled. Our lineup would with Vlad will be the best lineup we have had in 13 years: 1. 2B. S- Roberts2. RF. L - Markakis3. 1B. R - Lee4. DH. R - Vlad5. LF. L - Scott6. 3B. R - Reynolds7. CF. R - Jones8. C. S - Wieters9. SS. R - Hardy That is a solid 1-9 lineup. More importantly, it takes pressure off of Markakis to be the #3 hitter allowing him to hit in his more natural #2 spot, and young guys like Jones and Wieters can hit lower down in the lineup with less pressure. Please sign Vlad! On the flip side, if the Vlad and Lee signings don't workout, you simply trade them at the trade deadline and get some more prospects. As bad as a team we have been in this hopeless AL East, you really can't lose by signing Vlad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papasmurfbell Posted January 29, 2011 Share Posted January 29, 2011 I believe a guy thatis bad in the club house can have a lasting effect on young players. Do you really want to ruin young players with old ones who are only there for a check. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dc. Posted January 29, 2011 Share Posted January 29, 2011 Vlad has a great reputation in the clubhouse, though. Now, if he's unhappy - that may change, as it did with Miggy. But his reputation in the clubhouse is strong. But I worry about that as well - will he 'fit in' Meanwhile, I laugh at people who say this team is fine without him. Or who worry about getting Luke Scott at bats. There is a reason Luke Scott (and Felix Pie) have been part times players their entire careers. And I am more than hopeful that they will show they can do more. But both are very flawed players. I hardly value a 32/33 year old Luke Scott more than Vlad, even at 36. It's sad to think that Luke was our biggest power bat and our best overall bat ... and he hit 282/27/77. Why should we be happy with that production as our best production returning? Simply put - we shouldn't be. If you can get Vlad for a year deal, the best part is that he is marketable. Just like Lee. They don't need to be long term solutions. See how they fit. If we're really out of it come July, send them on their way. Because you know at that point a contender will be looking for a 60 day lease on a DH or 1B. But if they produce and we benefit? Even better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thundercleetz Posted January 29, 2011 Share Posted January 29, 2011 I believe a guy thatis bad in the club house can have a lasting effect on young players. Do you really want to ruin young players with old ones who are only there for a check. After 13 losing seasons, I really don't care nor do I think it matters. If our front office was worried about ruining the young players with older guys only playing for a paycheck, they wouldn't have signed Derrek Lee. Who do we have to ruin? The only thing Markakis and Roberts know is losing. As for the rest of the young guys, maybe it would do them some good being motivated by a pay check to play better, I mean it's not like Wieters or Jones aren't going to bolt as soon as they hit free agency. Baseball isn't the team sport football is, if a guy wants to play for a paycheck, go for it. It can benefit the team. And isn't this the reason we signed a big name, no nonsense guy like Buck? When Buck took over this clearly became Buck's team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papasmurfbell Posted January 29, 2011 Share Posted January 29, 2011 Yes it does matter. If a guy comes in and ruins your young players it has now hurt you long term. Who was the pitcher that basically came in and showed our young staff that being lazy and drunk was a good thing? Ponson was a young guy when he was around. He was a bad influence on our staff back then and I think it made them worse long term. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
millz58 Posted January 30, 2011 Author Share Posted January 30, 2011 Yes it does matter. If a guy comes in and ruins your young players it has now hurt you long term. Who was the pitcher that basically came in and showed our young staff that being lazy and drunk was a good thing? Ponson was a young guy when he was around. He was a bad influence on our staff back then and I think it made them worse long term.Scott Erickson was the dude who influenced Ponson, they were party buddies to a point. Ponson was just bad period. But really that kind of 'beyond the pale' idiocy (like with sosa, raffy, & miggy w/steroids, whatever) is not an issue with this current team. If the worst we get is a slightly unmotivated and possibly disgruntled DH/1B who still has some decent power numbers and can act professionally in the meantime, we win metaphorically, maybe even really. And both Vlad and Lee have experience with good teams, so they can impart sound advice to youngsters just by going about their business; there's no pressure on them except their own wish to perform for some later contract, which should be enough motivation for them at their ages. I say having both players would be great, no problem platooning Scott & Pie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papasmurfbell Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 I can see a guy not being very profesional and that rubbing off on the young guys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thundercleetz Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 Yes it does matter. If a guy comes in and ruins your young players it has now hurt you long term. Who was the pitcher that basically came in and showed our young staff that being lazy and drunk was a good thing? Ponson was a young guy when he was around. He was a bad influence on our staff back then and I think it made them worse long term. I agree with Millz, if you have a guy that is that easily influenced he is probably not a player you want on your team in the first place. Plus, there is a big difference between influencing off-the-field habits (such as work ethic) and influencing a general me-first attitude. Vlad is known to be a very hard worker who puts time in the batting cage and is known to be a fun loving guy in the clubhouse that everyone gets along with. If Vlad wants to go out there angry and prove a point by hitting 30 home runs, let him, it benefits the team. Quite frankly, I would love it if a guy like Wieters grew a pair and went out there and started mashing. Before Buck took over, I heard the guys in the clubhouse were giving Wieters a hard time for all the hype he received. It was only when Buck took over and ordered them to stop that Wieters started hitting a little better. I just see the risk with Vlad very low even if he doesn't want to be here. Number one, he doesn't speak much English. The odds that he is telling a young guy like Wieters what to do is low. And the odds that any potential bad attitude rubs off on the young guys on our pitching staff, such as Arrieta, Matusz, Bergesen, Tillman and Britton are even lower. The bottom line, baseball is like any other sport. If you are winning games, everyone will be happy. If you are losing, there are going to be disgruntled players on the team no matter what. If we are terribly out of it by the trade deadline, trade guys like Vlad and Lee. No big deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.