Turn Off Ads?
Page 18 of 24 FirstFirst ... 8141516171819202122 ... LastLast
Results 256 to 270 of 350

Thread: Tony Cingrani Thread

  1. #256
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    3,796

    Re: Cingrani on pace to be the next Cole Hamels?

    Cingrani on pace to have the Cy Young award renamed after him?
    Opinions are like belly buttons. Everybody has one, and they don't want someone else's shoved into their face.

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #257
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    913

    Re: Tony Cingrani Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by 757690 View Post
    Here are the rules from the CBA:




    Looks to me like Cingrani doesn't have to spend anymore time in the minors. The 20 day rule seems only to apply to players optioned during the season to the minors for more than 20 days. I don't see anything about consecutive days either.

    The key rule is the first one. Cingrani's service time started the day he physically appeared with the team, which was April 18th. That would give him only 165 days of service time this season, less than a full season.
    Umm, it's in your quote.

    "ML service time is not credited during any period or periods of optional assignment totaling 20 days or more during a single season."

    Cingrani is on the 40 man, and therefore on optional assignment to AAA. He was sent down for assignment at the start of the year. For assignments for more than 20 days, MLB service time does not accrue. He was not on assignment for 20 days, and therefore his MLB service time did accrue.

    Yes, if Cingrani had put in 20 days it would be the date he reported. Yet there is a 20 day provision, and at the start of the season if a player is called up before those 20 days his MLB service time goes back to opening day (it's actually the first day of the season, not the Reds opening day). That would be March 31st. He was 2 days short.
    Last edited by scott91575; 04-30-2013 at 12:40 PM.

  4. #258
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    875

    Re: Cingrani on pace to be the next Cole Hamels?

    I'm 90% sure Cingrani was sent here by Papa John Schattner to bankrupt LaRosa's.

  5. Likes:

    *BaseClogger* (04-30-2013), Chip R (04-30-2013), cumberlandreds (04-30-2013), Old school 1983 (04-30-2013), RedlegJake (04-30-2013), Superdude (04-30-2013), Tom Servo (04-30-2013)

  6. #259
    Moderator RedlegJake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    North Kansas City, Mo
    Posts
    5,759

    Re: Cingrani on pace to be the next Cole Hamels?

    Boy is the Cingrani hyperbole getting thick. I almost hope he has a human outing just to tamp things down....something normal like 10 k's and 2 runs allowed.

  7. #260
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    913

    Re: Cingrani for Cy Young/Rookie of the Year?

    Quote Originally Posted by Caveat Emperor View Post
    Perfect move for an organization that's been trying to shed a negative reputation earned over decades of Schott and Linder ownership as being pro bottom-line / anti-player.

    Doing roster-voodoo to deny one of your system-guys a payday years down the road doesn't exactly create the kind of environment that makes people say "I want to be a Cincinnati Red for life."
    It doesn't have to look like roster voodoo (he was called up as an injury replacement), and the Reds would certainly not be the only team to do those things anyway. Heck, the Yankees waited until May for Robinson Cano. The Red Sox didn't call up Jon Lester until June. The Nats waited to call up both Harper and Strasburg. Cards waited until April 26th to call up John Jay, and they waited until June for Lance Lynn. The Dodgers waited until late May to call up Matt Kemp. I could go on and on and on with every single major league franchise, even the ones people see as some sort of beacon of how an organization should be run. It's how the game is played, and you see that in how few rookies start the year in the majors.

    If the Reds sent him down for some minor league scrub for a few weeks, yes, that would look bad. Yet that is not the case. How bad would it look if after 6 weeks they get rid of Leake for a guy who is not proven? You don't think that wouldn't bring bad will? I am sure Cingrani will be able to handle any moves the Reds make without holding any ill will. Besides, by the time it comes to sign him to a long term deal it will mostly be about money anyway.
    Last edited by scott91575; 04-30-2013 at 01:20 PM.

  8. #261
    Vottobot
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Cincinnati
    Posts
    133

    Re: Cingrani on pace to be the next Cole Hamels?

    I have learned quickly not to judge a pitcher until he has seen teams multiple times... Let him go around the league once or twice before you start putting huge labels on the guy.
    Go Redlegs!!

  9. Likes:

    mth123 (05-01-2013)

  10. #262
    Member 757690's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Dayton
    Posts
    10,301

    Re: Tony Cingrani Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by scott91575 View Post
    Umm, it's in your quote.

    "ML service time is not credited during any period or periods of optional assignment totaling 20 days or more during a single season."

    Cingrani is on the 40 man, and therefore on optional assignment to AAA. He was sent down for assignment at the start of the year. For assignments for more than 20 days, MLB service time does not accrue. He was not on assignment for 20 days, and therefore his MLB service time did accrue.

    Yes, if Cingrani had put in 20 days it would be the date he reported. Yet there is a 20 day provision, and at the start of the season if a player is called up before those 20 days his MLB service time goes back to opening day (it's actually the first day of the season, not the Reds opening day). That would be March 31st. He was 2 days short.
    Okay, thanks.

    But then the Reds could just send him down for two days, they don't have to send him down for 20, just to be clear.
    "Man, the pitch looks fast, even in slow motion." Thom Brennaman on Chapman's fastball.

  11. #263
    Titanic Struggles Caveat Emperor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    The 513
    Posts
    12,639

    Re: Cingrani for Cy Young/Rookie of the Year?

    Quote Originally Posted by scott91575 View Post
    It doesn't have to look like roster voodoo (he was called up as an injury replacement), and the Reds would certainly not be the only team to do those things anyway. Heck, the Yankees waited until May for Robinson Cano. The Red Sox didn't call up Jon Lester until June. The Nats waited to call up both Harper and Strasburg. Cards waited until April 26th to call up John Jay, and they waited until June for Lance Lynn. The Dodgers waited until late May to call up Matt Kemp. I could go on and on and on with every single major league franchise, even the ones people see as some sort of beacon of how an organization should be run. It's how the game is played, and you see that in how few rookies start the year in the majors.

    If the Reds sent him down for some minor league scrub for a few weeks, yes, that would look bad. Yet that is not the case. How bad would it look if after 6 weeks they get rid of Leake for a guy who is not proven? You don't think that wouldn't bring bad will? I am sure Cingrani will be able to handle any moves the Reds make without holding any ill will. Besides, by the time it comes to sign him to a long term deal it will mostly be about money anyway.
    There's an enormous difference between "We're waiting to call him up until X date" and "He's dominating major league hitters, but we're going to send him down for a few weeks, reducing our ability to compete and win, for contract reasons 5 years from now."

    They're both games teams play, but the latter sends a message that results and winning take a back-seat to saving a buck whenever possible all while, simultaneously, directly impacting Tony Cingrani financially in the future.

    It's the functional equivalent of sitting a dude down during the stretch run in September to avoid him hitting incentives for ABs or HRs in his contract. That wouldn't fly (in the clubhouse or in the stands), this shouldn't either.
    Championships Matter.
    23 Years and Counting...

  12. #264
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    913

    Re: Tony Cingrani Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by 757690 View Post
    Okay, thanks.

    But then the Reds could just send him down for two days, they don't have to send him down for 20, just to be clear.
    No, that is not the case. First of all, you can't send a guy down for 2 days. 10 days is the minimum. The only reason a guy can be brought up before that is for an injury replacement. Second, those 18 days are gone. If you call up a guy before those 20 days are up, it's just like he was on the 25 man the whole time. He would have to go down for 20 consecutive days. That is what it means by "period" or "periods."

    If an assignment lasts less than 20 days, none of that time is counted.

  13. #265
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    913

    Re: Cingrani for Cy Young/Rookie of the Year?

    Quote Originally Posted by Caveat Emperor View Post
    There's an enormous difference between "We're waiting to call him up until X date" and "He's dominating major league hitters, but we're going to send him down for a few weeks, reducing our ability to compete and win, for contract reasons 5 years from now."

    They're both games teams play, but the latter sends a message that results and winning take a back-seat to saving a buck whenever possible all while, simultaneously, directly impacting Tony Cingrani financially in the future.

    It's the functional equivalent of sitting a dude down during the stretch run in September to avoid him hitting incentives for ABs or HRs in his contract. That wouldn't fly (in the clubhouse or in the stands), this shouldn't either.
    I personally think holding a spot on the roster for a guy but letting him sit in the minors is worse. In this case, Cingrani was called up as an injury replacement. It is completely understandable that he would be sent down when Cueto gets healthy. It is also completely understandable to want to give Leake more than 6 or so starts. This circumstance is way more understandable than the ones where a guy is pretty much penciled into the starting lineup or rotation, but is sent down to the minors in order to wait for a certain timeframe to be up.

    You also have to remember, Cingrani is not mowing down the 27 Yankees here. He has faced the 22nd, 27th, and 30th ranked offenses for runs. That 22nd ranked team is also brutal vs. left handers (.616 OPS). I think people are getting a little bit ahead of themselves here. I should have elaborated some more. The service time issue is certainly a big plus, and a factor. Yet it's not the only reason. It's not like I am asking a regular starter to be sent down after he was named a regular part of the rotation coming out of Spring training. Ditching Leake after what, 6, maybe 7 starts would look pretty bad in the clubhouse too. Cingrani also has some things he needs to work on. I am not sold Cingrani is a new ace after 3 starts. Maybe I am wrong, but there is more than enough reasons to send him down that are completely reasonable. So while the service time thing is a plus, it's would not be the only thing the Reds could and would use as a reason. It would be way more understandable than all the other teams who are blatantly letting a guy sit in the minors.
    Last edited by scott91575; 04-30-2013 at 02:00 PM.

  14. #266
    Member 757690's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Dayton
    Posts
    10,301

    Re: Tony Cingrani Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by scott91575 View Post
    No, that is not the case. First of all, you can't send a guy down for 2 days. 10 days is the minimum. The only reason a guy can be brought up before that is for an injury replacement. Second, those 18 days are gone. If you call up a guy before those 20 days are up, it's just like he was on the 25 man the whole time. He would have to go down for 20 consecutive days. That is what it means by "period" or "periods."

    If an assignment lasts less than 20 days, none of that time is counted.
    ML service time is not credited during any period or periods of optional assignment totaling 20 days or more during a single season
    Seems to me you can combine multiple option assignments, as long as they all take place in a single season.

    If the Reds send down Cingrani when they activate Cueto, then three days later place another pitcher on the DL, they can then call up Cingrani. That happens pretty often.
    "Man, the pitch looks fast, even in slow motion." Thom Brennaman on Chapman's fastball.

  15. #267
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    913

    Re: Tony Cingrani Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by 757690 View Post
    Seems to me you can combine multiple option assignments, as long as they all take place in a single season.

    If the Reds send down Cingrani when they activate Cueto, then three days later place another pitcher on the DL, they can then call up Cingrani. That happens pretty often.
    Perhaps you are right. I think I read something else wrong. Of course that would still require someone to get "injured" and willingly go on the DL.

    If it is done that way, then it will more certainly come across as "roster voodoo."
    Last edited by scott91575; 04-30-2013 at 02:40 PM.

  16. #268
    Member medford's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    2,083

    Re: Cingrani on pace to be the next Cole Hamels?

    man you guys are pessimistic these days. With a name like Cingrani, he's bound to be pope some day, probably even cure the common cold in the offseason.

  17. #269
    Et tu, Brutus? Brutus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Atlanta, Ga.
    Posts
    10,565

    Re: Cingrani on pace to be the next Cole Hamels?

    Cingrani has already been dubbed CYAW, ROY, a mirror image of Cliff Lee and the next Cole Hamels.

    This guy has some serious street cred going here.
    "No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference." ~Tommy Lasorda

  18. #270
    Titanic Struggles Caveat Emperor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    The 513
    Posts
    12,639

    Re: Cingrani for Cy Young/Rookie of the Year?

    Quote Originally Posted by scott91575 View Post
    I personally think holding a spot on the roster for a guy but letting him sit in the minors is worse. In this case, Cingrani was called up as an injury replacement. It is completely understandable that he would be sent down when Cueto gets healthy. It is also completely understandable to want to give Leake more than 6 or so starts. This circumstance is way more understandable than the ones where a guy is pretty much penciled into the starting lineup or rotation, but is sent down to the minors in order to wait for a certain timeframe to be up.

    You also have to remember, Cingrani is not mowing down the 27 Yankees here. He has faced the 22nd, 27th, and 30th ranked offenses for runs. That 22nd ranked team is also brutal vs. left handers (.616 OPS). I think people are getting a little bit ahead of themselves here. I should have elaborated some more. The service time issue is certainly a big plus, and a factor. Yet it's not the only reason. It's not like I am asking a regular starter to be sent down after he was named a regular part of the rotation coming out of Spring training. Ditching Leake after what, 6, maybe 7 starts would look pretty bad in the clubhouse too. Cingrani also has some things he needs to work on. I am not sold Cingrani is a new ace after 3 starts. Maybe I am wrong, but there is more than enough reasons to send him down that are completely reasonable. So while the service time thing is a plus, it's would not be the only thing the Reds could and would use as a reason. It would be way more understandable than all the other teams who are blatantly letting a guy sit in the minors.
    Leake's been demonstrably mediocre for over a year now. It's not like he hasn't been given an ample opportunity to prove his worth, and it's likely he'd remain on the team in the bullpen anyway. Players lose their gigs to younger, more talented players all the time -- it's the way of things in professional sports and it rarely fractures the locker room if the kid is lighting it up while the vet isn't.

    But that's really neither here nor there -- my only point is that it'd be a bush-league move on the part of the franchise to send down a guy who is mowing through the majors and helping the team win games right now just to keep his service time from causing financial problems in the future. Nothing more.
    Championships Matter.
    23 Years and Counting...

  19. Likes:

    bigredmechanism (04-30-2013), Bumstead (04-30-2013), membengal (04-30-2013), RedEye (04-30-2013), The Operator (04-30-2013)


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25