PDA

View Full Version : Mannyball



15fan
02-20-2012, 10:22 PM
Ramirez to the A's (http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/7594873/manny-ramirez-agrees-deal-oakland-as)

Edd Roush
02-20-2012, 10:32 PM
I don't know why more teams weren't interested in such a low-risk proposition. Manny is guaranteed hardly money in this deal and he agreed to a minor league deal. I know I was in the minority of wanting Manny in Cincinnati, but I really think the A's made a great low-risk, high-reward move here.

Captain Hook
02-20-2012, 10:39 PM
I have to agree with Edd. I don't really like Manny but I do like guys that are future Hall of Famers and that are obviously not doing it for the money.He must feel like he has something to prove and if he's willing to start proving it in AAA why wouldn't you give him a shot.

The Operator
02-20-2012, 10:41 PM
I agree. He couldn't be any worse than some of the other LF options The Reds have trotted out there the past few years.

Dom Heffner
02-20-2012, 10:41 PM
He'll hold tremendous trade value at the deadline if his bat is halfway decent.

Beane could get a prospect or two...

Sea Ray
02-20-2012, 11:06 PM
It is a great low risk deal but I don't think Manny's got anything left in the tank. I could be wrong. It'll be fun to watch

GADawg
02-20-2012, 11:29 PM
makes sense for several teams probably but I don't get the A's being one of them.

I envision the A's being the Indians from Major League....trying to lose and bolt Oakland for San Jose. Gomes, Manny, and Cespedes? could be my new favorite AL team

RedFanAlways1966
02-21-2012, 07:23 AM
Not sure, but lets see if Manny can perform without PEDs at this age. Then again perhaps he has been aided by PEDs for his whole career (imagine that).

One failed test from how many games suspension? Oh wait... he will just quit and not serve 1/2 of it. You know like the last failed test. Or the times he quit on his teams (ask Boston or LAD). Keep this clown far away from the team I like.

The reduction of the suspension from 100 to 50 games. Are you kidding me? What a joke. Be a quitter and we will reduce your suspension by 50 games. That's the way to crack down on PEDs and reward cheaters-n-quitters. You think the testing program is legit? Bud $elig and the Union ha$ $wampland for you if you have the ca$h. Yes, same for the Volquez gets to serve his suspension while on the DL. Joke! I ain't gots no brain... and believe the testing is great.

bucksfan2
02-21-2012, 08:18 AM
He'll hold tremendous trade value at the deadline if his bat is halfway decent.

Beane could get a prospect or two...

I think Beane is 100% in that mode right now. He is doing everything he can to put a team together of nice trading pieces and then unload them come middle of the summer.

klw
02-21-2012, 09:37 AM
Unless I am overlooking another date, the Reds only play Oakland once in Spring Training- March 10. Hopefully the Reds will bring Chris "Why did Washington give anybody up for Gomes" Manno over from the minor league side to face Manny. Let them go at it Manno y Manny.

http://springtrainingonline.com/teams/cincinnati-reds-3.htm

REDREAD
02-21-2012, 10:13 AM
I guess it's an interesting side show. Maybe it will stir up a little interest in Oakland, but I doubt Manny is productive on the field. He'll probably be productive at stirring up drama though.

I'm guessing the Reds get more total production out of their LF options (plus Manny can't really play LF anymore).

Sea Ray
02-21-2012, 02:53 PM
The reduction of the suspension from 100 to 50 games. Are you kidding me? What a joke. Be a quitter and we will reduce your suspension by 50 games. That's the way to crack down on PEDs and reward cheaters-n-quitters. You think the testing program is legit? Bud $elig and the Union ha$ $wampland for you if you have the ca$h. Yes, same for the Volquez gets to serve his suspension while on the DL. Joke! I ain't gots no brain... and believe the testing is great.

I agree with you there and it sure seems like this reduction hasn't gotten the publicity that it should. He had every opportunity "to serve" this suspension last year and I said so at the time. My thoughts were why retire? Retire 100 games later if you want. Instead he pouts and goes home. Fast forward to this year and MLB gives him a huge break on his suspension. Why let him benefit by pouting? Why set this sort of precedent? If he either comes up dirty again this year or retires abruptly before the end of the year then I think MLB should be called on the carpet for allowing themselves to be used by Manny. It won't reflect well on them

Chip R
02-21-2012, 03:10 PM
Does he get to play in the minor leagues while serving his suspension?

REDREAD
02-21-2012, 03:20 PM
I agree with you there and it sure seems like this reduction hasn't gotten the publicity that it should. He had every opportunity "to serve" this suspension last year and I said so at the time. My thoughts were why retire? Retire 100 games later if you want. Instead he pouts and goes home. Fast forward to this year and MLB gives him a huge break on his suspension. Why let him benefit by pouting? Why set this sort of precedent? If he either comes up dirty again this year or retires abruptly before the end of the year then I think MLB should be called on the carpet for allowing themselves to be used by Manny. It won't reflect well on them

MLB really doesn't care about cleaning itself up.
They'd much rather have Manny playing and selling a few more tickets.
That explains a lot of their behavior :)

Sea Ray
02-21-2012, 03:25 PM
Does he get to play in the minor leagues while serving his suspension?

So far as I know, minor leaguers are subject to the same rules so I'd say the answer's no. Haven't minor leaguers had to serve these suspensions too after being caught?

Sea Ray
02-21-2012, 03:27 PM
MLB really doesn't care about cleaning itself up.
They'd much rather have Manny playing and selling a few more tickets.
That explains a lot of their behavior :)

That's sure what it looks like and that doesn't reflect well on them. Do they really want to start a precedent where the Manny's of the world get treated differently than guys like Volquez?

Chip R
02-21-2012, 04:26 PM
So far as I know, minor leaguers are subject to the same rules so I'd say the answer's no. Haven't minor leaguers had to serve these suspensions too after being caught?

I thought Manny played in the minors - perhaps it was a rehab assignment - during his previous suspension.

LegallyMinded
02-21-2012, 07:25 PM
That's sure what it looks like and that doesn't reflect well on them. Do they really want to start a precedent where the Manny's of the world get treated differently than guys like Volquez?

Considering Volquez got to serve his suspension while he was on the DL, I'd say he got treated substantially the same as Manny-- both of them, that is, were basically allowed to count time they would not have been playing anyway towards their suspensions.

As for MLB wanting to clean up the game in general, I think they've come a long way since the days of Bonds, Sosa, et al. Let's see what they do with the Ryan Braun appeal, for instance, before we rush to judgment.

RedFanAlways1966
02-21-2012, 08:57 PM
As for MLB wanting to clean up the game in general, I think they've come a long way since the days of Bonds, Sosa, et al. Let's see what they do with the Ryan Braun appeal, for instance, before we rush to judgment.

But why have they come a long way? Because the media (god help me, but Jose Canseco too) exposed it or b/c they care? I do not know, but I think it is the exposure that caused it. Do we think MLB had no clue what was happening during the prime steroid years? No chance. I didn't know and feel duped as a loyal fan, but we should all know better than to believe the powers did not know. And they cho$e to allow it.

With that being said... how STRINGENT is the testing? Here is my theory and one that I believe happens in most (all?) major sports. The players are informed many weeks/months in advance of their test. They have plenty of time to cleanse themselves. Those who are stupid (Manny and some others) fail. And now we see suspensions being reduced.

Do we really believe that rich and young men are not doing recreational drugs too? How many suspensions do we see in MLB, NFL and NBA for this? I never remember Jonathon Joseph or Chris Henry failing a test, but they were caught by the law for possession. NFL example, but footballers are no different than other pro athletes in the party-thing. Well there must be a superior masking agent or something smells rotten in pro sports. Anyone know the statistics for the % of the population that does recreational drugs? My guess is that it is much higher than the number of failed tests for pro athletes. How can this be? And why no blood tests? These athletes have surgeries and have to undergo physicals, but do not want blood tested for drugs. Why?

Perhaps I am just another whacko conspiracy type, but the lack of fails seems odd. And now we see "stars" (Volquez, meh) getting reprieves. Do the Mannys and Brauns $ell tickets and merchandise? As long as enough of the most important people to the games (FANS) are OK with it, then MBL/NFL/NBA will continue this charade IMO. They know they cannot get away with doing nothing (gov't, PCness, etc). You fooled me once (McGwire/Sosa/etc), but you are not fooling me again (I hear Roger Daltry singing).

Sea Ray
02-22-2012, 09:57 AM
Considering Volquez got to serve his suspension while he was on the DL, I'd say he got treated substantially the same as Manny-- both of them, that is, were basically allowed to count time they would not have been playing anyway towards their suspensions.

As for MLB wanting to clean up the game in general, I think they've come a long way since the days of Bonds, Sosa, et al. Let's see what they do with the Ryan Braun appeal, for instance, before we rush to judgment.

They handled Volquez like any other player. They negotiated the Manny reduction down to 50 games just one month ago. Surely you see the difference???

LegallyMinded
02-22-2012, 10:17 AM
They handled Volquez like any other player. They negotiated the Manny reduction down to 50 games just one month ago. Surely you see the difference???

You're assuming they would not have reduced the suspension for any player other than Manny. Do you have any evidence for that proposition? That is, do you have any indication MLB did not handle Manny just like anyone else?

Sea Ray
02-22-2012, 10:18 AM
You're assuming they would not have reduced the suspension for any player other than Manny. Do you have any evidence for that proposition? That is, do you have any indication MLB did not handle Manny just like anyone else?

I sure do. I don't know of any other instance where they've reduced a 2nd time offender from 100 to 50 games. Do you?

LegallyMinded
02-22-2012, 10:38 AM
I sure do. I don't know of any other instance where they've reduced a 2nd time offender from 100 to 50 games. Do you?

The absence of another other case like Manny's is not evidence that MLB treated Manny any differently than they would have another player. No one else has retired rather than serve a 100-game suspension for a second test, and so MLB has had no cause to reduce a player's suspension to 50 games under similar circumstances.

Remember, Manny's reduction was not simply MLB unilaterally handing down a magnanimous judgment. It was the result of a negotiated settlement between MLB and the players union, and I see no reason to believe that the players union would not have similarly represented a player other than Manny.

Sea Ray
02-22-2012, 12:45 PM
The absence of another other case like Manny's is not evidence that MLB treated Manny any differently than they would have another player. No one else has retired rather than serve a 100-game suspension for a second test, and so MLB has had no cause to reduce a player's suspension to 50 games under similar circumstances.

Remember, Manny's reduction was not simply MLB unilaterally handing down a magnanimous judgment. It was the result of a negotiated settlement between MLB and the players union, and I see no reason to believe that the players union would not have similarly represented a player other than Manny.

I think that is a bad precedent for MLB to have set. Until they do bend these rules for another "retiring player" this is a Manny-special ruling and that's not good

RedFanAlways1966
02-22-2012, 12:47 PM
The absence of another other case like Manny's is not evidence that MLB treated Manny any differently than they would have another player. No one else has retired rather than serve a 100-game suspension for a second test, and so MLB has had no cause to reduce a player's suspension to 50 games under similar circumstances.

Remember, Manny's reduction was not simply MLB unilaterally handing down a magnanimous judgment. It was the result of a negotiated settlement between MLB and the players union, and I see no reason to believe that the players union would not have similarly represented a player other than Manny.

Why was it reduced? I just did a search and the only thing I found was "because he sat out all last season". Really... what a joke. That is not a negotiation. That is BS. I failed for a 2nd time and then quit; therefore, I get my suspension cut in half. Nice work MLB. That's the way to show the public you care about cleaning up the sport. Future cheaters (those too dumb to cleanse in time) should just quit and then come back. Hopefully they have the name-power too.

Why negotiate? What is to be negotiated? YOU FAILED A 2nd TIME. The rules are in place and you failed a 2nd time.

Chip R
02-22-2012, 12:47 PM
I think that is a bad precedent for MLB to have set. Until they do bend these rules for another "retiring player" this is a Manny-special ruling and that's not good

Maybe Ryan Braun should "retire" and get his suspension reduced.

RedFanAlways1966
02-22-2012, 12:48 PM
Maybe Ryan Braun should "retire" and get his suspension reduced.

He has the name-power (MVP!). $ell$ ticket$ too.

blumj
02-22-2012, 01:54 PM
I gues they considered the retired timeout as time served? I mean, he didn't play and he didn't get paid, so I'm not sure in what tangible way it was unlike serving part of the suspension.

Chip R
02-22-2012, 02:18 PM
I gues they considered the retired timeout as time served? I mean, he didn't play and he didn't get paid, so I'm not sure in what tangible way it was unlike serving part of the suspension.

I think that's it right there.

Sea Ray
02-22-2012, 02:21 PM
I gues they considered the retired timeout as time served? I mean, he didn't play and he didn't get paid, so I'm not sure in what tangible way it was unlike serving part of the suspension.

If that's the case then why does he even have to serve 50 games? No, running away (retiring) should not get you out of a suspension. That makes it too easy. They should go through the program just like anyone else. He took the escape way out and MLB enabled it. I think that's BS

RedFanAlways1966
02-22-2012, 03:34 PM
I gues they considered the retired timeout as time served? I mean, he didn't play and he didn't get paid, so I'm not sure in what tangible way it was unlike serving part of the suspension.

Not attacking you blumj...

So we reward a quitter? Baloney. I know the prison system reduces time for good behavior (also ridiculous but for another forum), but MLB should reduce suspensions for quitting? Nonsense. If MLB claims this, then they are ridiculous. I think the whole testing program is baloney. It is way-way down the priority list behind money, money, money and money.

IslandRed
02-22-2012, 10:23 PM
I think Beane is 100% in that mode right now. He is doing everything he can to put a team together of nice trading pieces and then unload them come middle of the summer.

Yep. He can afford to take these flyers because there's no real downside to them busting. He knows they're not beating out the Rangers or Angels.

As for me, I'm in the camp that believes a 40-year-old who hasn't played meaningful ball for 18 months and got a "don't let the door hit you" from his last four clubs -- although I guess it's really three out of four, since he bolted from Tampa on his own -- isn't going to do anything, and as the Reds are (1) in the National League and (2) trying, I wanted no part of him. But it'll be interesting to watch if he does get it together.

blumj
02-23-2012, 07:50 AM
Not attacking you blumj...

So we reward a quitter? Baloney. I know the prison system reduces time for good behavior (also ridiculous but for another forum), but MLB should reduce suspensions for quitting? Nonsense. If MLB claims this, then they are ridiculous. I think the whole testing program is baloney. It is way-way down the priority list behind money, money, money and money.
I don't disagree that money's priority #1, I just have a really hard time seeing Manny as much of a draw anymore. But maybe they do, and they didn't know it would be Oakland. It would be so like Manny to fail another test, though, which would be the ultimate "you get what you deserve" for everyone involved.

Tony Cloninger
02-23-2012, 09:32 AM
If Kenny Williams would have signed him....I wonder if people would be saying what a great signing it was.

Edd Roush
02-23-2012, 11:51 AM
If Kenny Williams would have signed him....I wonder if people would be saying what a great signing it was.

I can't speak for others, but Manny would be a pretty good fit on pretty much any ballclub. He is cheap insurance with an All-Star upside bat if one of your corner outfielders go down, or in the AL if your DH goes down. I think he would mean more to a contender (although most teams are probably thinking they are contenders right now) than a team that is trying to re-build.

If Manny acts up, you cut him. If he doesn't act up, but he doesn't regain his batting stroke, then he doesn't cost you anything. Obviously the best case scenario (which may in fact be the least likely) is that he doesn't act up and he does hit (like he has his whole career), then you have a big bat on your hands and I don't know how pretty much any contender would not want that kind of cheap insurance with such great upside.

Kenny Williams does make a lot of dumb moves, no denying that. In this case, he would be smart to add Manny like any contending GM would be if they signed him. But he didn't...