PDA

View Full Version : Felipe Lopez?


NLaloosh
02-13-2010, 10:27 AM
I know that he's not a powerful left handed DH. However, he might be a usefuel pickup.

If the Sox could get him for one year at $ 2 mil. they could let Nix go and still have money to add a big bat later.

In the mean time Lopez had a really good year offensively last year. Plus, he's a switch hitter and he would be great insurance at 2b, 3b and SS in case of injury.

And, he has some speed off the bench. I just think that he'd be much more useful than Jayson Nix and if there was an injury and the Sox needed a starter in the infield he might do the job real well.

Brian26
02-13-2010, 10:30 AM
I don't think the Sox have $2 million to throw away on a utility infielder they don't really need since they're already committed to Vizquel and Nix. That $2 million could be used as part of the Damon package.

asindc
02-13-2010, 10:30 AM
Not a bad idea, IMO. He started at 2B for the Nats in 2008 but did not play well while here. He played better in Arizona and I do think he could start and play effectively if needed. Is Nix out of options? Not that it would prevent me from making the move, but just wondering. By the way, I don't think KW will spend $2 million a year on a strictly bench player at this point. He might do $1 million at the most.

soxinem1
02-13-2010, 10:42 AM
Without Vizquel and Nix, maybe, but what would we do with him now?

Good to hear Lopez fired his agent, however.....

A. Cavatica
02-13-2010, 11:24 AM
This makes the money we threw away on Vizquel look even dumber.

Noneck
02-13-2010, 11:32 AM
Is Nix out of options?

Yes he is.

Noneck
02-13-2010, 11:37 AM
This makes the money we threw away on Vizquel look even dumber.

I think Lopez would have been a better fit also but no way of knowing he would be available now at this price. Hindsight is 20/20.

psyclonis
02-13-2010, 12:33 PM
Lopez is a starter... and an above average 2B.
How can anyone consider him an utility player? :scratch:
We already have a 2B.

getonbckthr
02-13-2010, 12:45 PM
This makes the money we threw away on Vizquel look even dumber.
Not to mention the money we spent on Teahen. For the record I prefer Getz to Teahen. Especially now considering moves we would have had money to make.

Noneck
02-13-2010, 12:51 PM
Not to mention the money we spent on Teahen. For the record I prefer Getz to Teahen. Especially now considering moves we would have had money to make.

Agree on: Lopez, Getz, Fields, +$$$ > Teahan and Vizquel, but how did one know that it would turn out like this at that time.

getonbckthr
02-13-2010, 01:04 PM
Agree on: Lopez, Getz, Fields, +$$$ > Teahan and Vizquel, but how did one know that it would turn out like this at that time.
You can go back to when we traded for Teahen and signed Vizquel. I was upset then about the fact we wasted money and now I'm more frustrated because of how the market ended up.

Noneck
02-13-2010, 01:13 PM
You can go back to when we traded for Teahen and signed Vizquel. I was upset then about the fact we wasted money and now I'm more frustrated because of how the market ended up.

Yea I know I felt the same but no way anyone knew a guy like this would be available at this price. To me the Teahen deal made no sense and now seeing what a guy like Lopez is going to get, the Teahen extension made even less sense. Vizquel did make sense at time, they did need an experienced backup infielder. But as I said before its easy to judge the market after the fact.

asindc
02-13-2010, 01:14 PM
You can go back to when we traded for Teahen and signed Vizquel. I was upset then about the fact we wasted money and now I'm more frustrated because of how the market ended up.

Yes, but that is the point being made. No one knew the market would end up this way. Who knew that Damon would turn down $6 million plus incentives from NYY only to be still looking for a job less than a week before ST starts. Who knew players like Lopez would still be available at this point?

Lip Man 1
02-13-2010, 06:04 PM
Many people around baseball and some in the media were saying all this past season that the off season would be repeat of the year before (i.e. a buyer's market)

Lip

tm1119
02-13-2010, 06:07 PM
Agree on: Lopez, Getz, Fields, +$$$ > Teahan and Vizquel, but how did one know that it would turn out like this at that time.


The $ would be very minimal after you factor in the money we received from the Royals. Most likely only about $1-1.5 mil. Peanuts to a MLB franchise. Next you factor that is was more than apparent that Fields was done here in Chicago. He would have wasted away another year in Charlotte. Also, Lopez is only going to sign a 1 year deal and hope for a better deal next season. So after this season it would have been Getz and the 1.5 mil that most likely wont make a difference anyway. I'll take the risk that Teahen is a more productive player than Getz.

Noneck
02-13-2010, 06:38 PM
It ended up and was predicted to be a buyers market except for some top tier players.

But sitting on ones hands until the end of the off season to get the after Christmas bargains would not have sat well with the fan base and as a result the advance ticket sales.

Then there was that possibly that it would not be a buyers a market and the early birds would be the ones getting the worms.

I always felt as though they did overpay, buyers market or not, for Teahen because they had a viable cheap alternative in Getz. This was a situation where they could have sat back and waited it out to see what would happen.

A veteran infielder was needed and Vizquel fit that bill at the time but now appears to be overpaid.

Finally, I now would rather have an infield of Ramirez, Getz, Beckham, Lopez and money that could be used on a DH or another lefty in the pen rather than Ramirez, Teahen, Beckham and Vizquel.

Hindsight is 20/20.

Noneck
02-13-2010, 06:45 PM
The $ would be very minimal after you factor in the money we received from the Royals. Most likely only about $1-1.5 mil.

Are you factoring in the extension Teahen got compared to what Getz would be making in future years? Also the what if Teahen goes south compared to if Getz goes south.

If we are just talking 1.5m for this year, the way things are looking that may be the difference in getting a DH compared to not getting one.

asindc
02-13-2010, 07:40 PM
It ended up and was predicted to be a buyers market except for some top tier players.

But sitting on ones hands until the end of the off season to get the after Christmas bargains would not have sat well with the fan base and as a result the advance ticket sales.

Then there was that possibly that it would not be a buyers a market and the early birds would be the ones getting the worms.

I always felt as though they did overpay, buyers market or not, for Teahen because they had a viable cheap alternative in Getz. This was a situation where they could have sat back and waited it out to see what would happen.

A veteran infielder was needed and Vizquel fit that bill at the time but now appears to be overpaid.

Finally, I now would rather have an infield of Ramirez, Getz, Beckham, Lopez and money that could be used on a DH or another lefty in the pen rather than Ramirez, Teahen, Beckham and Vizquel.

Hindsight is 20/20.

I agree 100%.

It's Dankerific
02-13-2010, 08:04 PM
Isn't projecting whats going to happen in the market, kinda, like, the GMs Job?

Frater Perdurabo
02-13-2010, 08:09 PM
I was wondering the same thing. Lopez had a nice 2009. You could always move Beckham back to 3B, start Lopez at 2B and have Teahen join the DH rotation. At this point, though, Damon would be a better signing.

Lillian
02-15-2010, 07:54 PM
If Beckham could play SS at the Big League level, I'd like to see Lopez at 2nd. Alexei might make good trade bait. I'm a little disillusioned with him, as I've stated before. His offensive game leaves a lot to be desired. 14 doubles and 1 triple over a whole season is pretty bad. He doesn't steal bases, and his OBP is not that great, although he did work a lot more bases on balls last year. He's only a year younger than Lopez.

Perhaps such a move is not doable, but if given a choice, I'd rather see Lopez than Ramirez in the lineup. Alexei's defense doesn't impress me much either, especially with all of the mental lapses. However, I really have no idea how good Lopez is. I understand he really shouldn't be at SS, so it would be Beckham at SS and Lopez at 2nd.

KMcMahon817
02-15-2010, 11:13 PM
If Beckham could play SS at the Big League level, I'd like to see Lopez at 2nd. Alexei might make good trade bait. I'm a little disillusioned with him, as I've stated before. His offensive game leaves a lot to be desired. 14 doubles and 1 triple over a whole season is pretty bad. He doesn't steal bases, and his OBP is not that great, although he did work a lot more bases on balls last year. He's only a year younger than Lopez.

Perhaps such a move is not doable, but if given a choice, I'd rather see Lopez than Ramirez in the lineup. Alexei's defense doesn't impress me much either, especially with all of the mental lapses. However, I really have no idea how good Lopez is. I understand he really shouldn't be at SS, so it would be Beckham at SS and Lopez at 2nd.


Beckham was never considered a major league calibur shortstop. If you dont like Alexei at SS, I think Gordon would make you cringe.

With that said, I think Alexei will be just fine at the plate this year. For all the people complaining about the lack of power in the lineup, moving Lopez into it over Alexei only makes that problem worse.

But, this wont happen, and Alexei is not going anywhere.

Slappy
02-15-2010, 11:27 PM
This struck me as strange today, even by Baseball Tonight standards:

They talked a bit about the Felipe Lopez situation, and even had Felipe on the phone trying to get his take.

Karl Ravech asked Felipe why he thought he was still unsigned and alluded that maybe it was because of some 'rumors' out there about his life 'off the field'. Felipe seemed a little stunned and when pressed was like 'I dunno man you were the one who brought it up!' It was really awkward!

Then, they finished the segment off with (now I can't remember his name-I hardly ever watch the show, sorry...) saying that he thought Felipe was unsigned because he is a 'quiet' 'mysterious' type that makes people unsure about him.

I thought it was some awfully silly speculation, all around.

Did anyone else see this, and what do you think?

KMcMahon817
02-16-2010, 02:51 AM
This struck me as strange today, even by Baseball Tonight standards:

They talked a bit about the Felipe Lopez situation, and even had Felipe on the phone trying to get his take.

Karl Ravech asked Felipe why he thought he was still unsigned and alluded that maybe it was because of some 'rumors' out there about his life 'off the field'. Felipe seemed a little stunned and when pressed was like 'I dunno man you were the one who brought it up!' It was really awkward!

Then, they finished the segment off with (now I can't remember his name-I hardly ever watch the show, sorry...) saying that he thought Felipe was unsigned because he is a 'quiet' 'mysterious' type that makes people unsure about him.

I thought it was some awfully silly speculation, all around.

Did anyone else see this, and what do you think?

Yeah, I was watching, and it was quite awkward. Lopez made it pretty clear that baseball isn't the most important thing in his life. Which is fine, but he kind of made it sound like something about his lifestyle is a liability to potentially interested teams.