PDA

View Full Version : Rios On Possibly Playing New Position


Lip Man 1
02-25-2012, 01:44 PM
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/chi-soxs-reluctant-rios-more-comfortable-in-cf-rf-20120225,0,6015657.story

Lip

kittle42
02-25-2012, 01:51 PM
I'd prefer he play the position of pinch runner.

dickallen15
02-25-2012, 02:04 PM
They pay him a lot of money. If he played CF anywhere near the level in which the pay him, he wouldn't be told to move to LF. If he doesn't like it, I prefer him in the position of stay at home dad.

Brian26
02-25-2012, 03:03 PM
Glad to see Alex coming into camp with a new and improved attitude.

GoGoCrede
02-25-2012, 03:05 PM
Glad to see Alex coming into camp with a new and improved attitude.

I really didn't see anything too negative in his comments at all. He was being honest, and it's not like he was publicly refusing to do it. Behind the scenes may be another story, of course, but these comments don't scream negativity. Trepidation, more like.

Dibbs
02-25-2012, 03:18 PM
Not sure why they wouldn't put Rios in right and Dayan in left. It doesn't make sense to have it the other way around, unless of course you are purposely sabotaging the chance at a better defense.

TDog
02-25-2012, 03:39 PM
I really didn't see anything too negative in his comments at all. He was being honest, and it's not like he was publicly refusing to do it. Behind the scenes may be another story, of course, but these comments don't scream negativity. Trepidation, more like.

I read more trepidation in the comment, too. Many find center the easiest of outfield positions to see judge balls. Right field is different, and the ball moves differently off the bat. Left is different from right and center. Right demands a better arm than left, especially for balls that make it through the infield on the ground, but right fielders generally get much fewer chances for putouts.

I have been critical of Rios' attitude and lazy defense since I saw him drop a routine fly his first weekend with the team. But I don't find fault with him for his comments here. He isn't going anywhere. I want to see him turn his attitude around and play up to his abilities. I'm not going to be overly critical about everything he says.

Brian26
02-25-2012, 03:41 PM
I really didn't see anything too negative in his comments at all.

The "Um" sets a bad tone (IMHO, of course).

GoGoCrede
02-25-2012, 03:54 PM
The "Um" sets a bad tone (IMHO, of course).

I agree, but I wonder if it was one of those "ums" that we all use that's meaningless. It's really hard to tell without a video.

ChiSoxGal85
02-25-2012, 03:57 PM
One thing I have accepted about Alex Rios is that he's not a good interview. I think it might be a combination of his English not being that great and that he's just a quiet guy. I can overlook whatever he says if he takes care of business on the field.

LITTLE NELL
02-25-2012, 04:01 PM
Not sure why they wouldn't put Rios in right and Dayan in left. It doesn't make sense to have it the other way around, unless of course you are purposely sabotaging the chance at a better defense.

I always wondered the same thing. Seems like most here at WSI are not too thrilled with Viciedo's defensive skills, so why not put him in LF?
That being said, Viciedo looked pretty good in RF last year in the games I got to see him on TV. I still think that Viciedo in LF, DeAza in CF and Rios in RF is the way to go.

HaroMaster87
02-25-2012, 04:04 PM
ugh...I.CAN.NOT.WAIT until this guy is GONE...

HaroMaster87
02-25-2012, 04:05 PM
I always wondered the same thing. Seems like most here at WSI are not too thrilled with Viciedo's defensive skills, so why not put him in LF?
That being said, Viciedo looked pretty good in RF last year in the games I got to see him on TV. I still think that Viciedo in LF, DeAza in CF and Rios in RF is the way to go.

I believe Tank has a better arm than Rios...

SoxSpeed22
02-25-2012, 04:07 PM
I don't think using Rios in left is a good use of his skills. It would help in spacious parks like Comerica park or Target field.

HaroMaster87
02-25-2012, 04:09 PM
I don't think using Rios in left is a good use of his skills. It would help in spacious parks like Comerica park or Target field.

Skills?? What skills?? You mean taking bad routes, dropping the ball or just flat out missing it? Yup...he has those skills...

WhiteSox5187
02-25-2012, 04:55 PM
I always wondered the same thing. Seems like most here at WSI are not too thrilled with Viciedo's defensive skills, so why not put him in LF?
That being said, Viciedo looked pretty good in RF last year in the games I got to see him on TV. I still think that Viciedo in LF, DeAza in CF and Rios in RF is the way to go.

I thought Vicideo looked lost in right when I went to a game and sat in the OF, he made Quentin look like a gold glover. I think moving him to left and Rios to right makes the most sense too.

Brian26
02-25-2012, 05:10 PM
I agree, but I wonder if it was one of those "ums" that we all use that's meaningless. It's really hard to tell without a video.

If it was, how incompetent by the writer to include it in the quote. Of course, nothing surprises me anymore in that respect.

Brian26
02-25-2012, 05:13 PM
I don't think using Rios in left is a good use of his skills. It would help in spacious parks like Comerica park or Target field.

A more spacious park would only expose Rios even more. He's a natural rightfielder that has become lazy over the years. It's humorous that he sounds offended (my take) about possibly playing left field.

GoGoCrede
02-25-2012, 05:14 PM
If it was, how incompetent by the writer to include it in the quote. Of course, nothing surprises me anymore in that respect.

Actually, I thought it was pretty deliberate of the writer if they had an intent to show Rios as being negative. But I really don't know the intent or motive behind it, so it might just be nothing. And I don't think Gonzales is the type to have malicious intentions. April needs to get here soon if we're debating the use of the word "Um." :tongue:

Brian26
02-25-2012, 05:16 PM
I thought Vicideo looked lost in right when I went to a game and sat in the OF, he made Quentin look like a gold glover. I think moving him to left and Rios to right makes the most sense too.

Viciedo was brutal in RF in September. The best place to watch him was/is from the upper deck behind home plate, as that's where you get a true read on catchable balls before they fall five feet in front of him because he broke back on them off the bat even though he's playing way too deep to begin with.

Brian26
02-25-2012, 05:19 PM
Actually, I thought it was pretty deliberate of the writer if they had an intent to show Rios as being negative.

Then you're agreeing with my original point, which is that the "um" (or the "ummmmm") illustrates a negative tone by Rios in the answer. If it was just a natural pause in his speech or stutter, the writer should not have included it, unless he's an incompetent hack, which is not out of the realm of possibility considering the journalistic rank and file now.

GoGoCrede
02-25-2012, 05:22 PM
Then you're agreeing with my original point, which is that the "um" (or the "ummmmm") illustrates a negative tone by Rios in the answer. If it was just a natural pause in his speech or stutter, the writer should not have included it, unless he's an incompetent hack, which is not out of the realm of possibility considering the journalistic rank and file now.

I see what you're saying, but the rest of Rios' comments were not negative, so I think there's a possibility the "um" wasn't meant negatively. As far as his attitude goes, all we have to go on is what he actually said until we get a video clip - and he actually said some okay stuff, "um" possibly withstanding.

I think I'm going in circles, I forgot what I was originally arguing!

Brian26
02-25-2012, 05:23 PM
I didn't catch that Gonzalez wrote the article until going back to it.

Also note that Gonzo went out of his way to say that Rios was "reluctant to elaborate details of his offseason hitting program".

GoGoCrede
02-25-2012, 05:25 PM
I didn't catch that Gonzalez wrote the article until going back to it.

Also note that Gonzo went out of his way to say that Rios was "reluctant to elaborate details of his offseason hitting program".

Yes, that's a bit suspect too. But if that and the "um" are the only things he's got to prove that Rios has a bad attitude about changing his position (if indeed he's trying to prove it), it seems like flimsy evidence at best.

I dunno, I'm just excited about the season and I like to think the players are too! :smile:

TDog
02-26-2012, 01:12 PM
If it was, how incompetent by the writer to include it in the quote. Of course, nothing surprises me anymore in that respect.

I have no idea how significant the "um' was. It is difficult enough for people to understand what words mean when they are written out that WSI had a color-codes system to let others know when sarcasm is intended.

I do know, however, that some reporters will clean up quotes only of people they have professional relationships while with. Anyone who has ever been in the business of quoting people can tell you that people, some more than others, often don't speak in grammatical sentences. There are fits and starts and fillers like "um" and "you know" while people think of what they are going to say next. Some reporters will filter those out, change the "irregardlesses" to "regardlesses" and such for people they have good relationships and understandings with while not doing so for people they aren't tight with. (The best examples that come to mind involve current controversial national political personalities that I won't offer.) This is why some athletes won't talk with any media and some others will only talk to their favorite reporters.

The Rios quote in question is something of a Rorschach test. If you have a problem with Rios, you are likely to have a problem with the quote. I don't care what Rios says. I never cared about the quotes by Frank Thomas that upset White Sox fans a decade and more ago. I really don't care what anyone associated with the White Sox says. I am concerned with how Rios plays. Rios' play has rarely impressed me. And if he continues to play below his apparent abilities in 2012, I'll be critical of him then.

Noneck
02-26-2012, 01:52 PM
I hope this is just something to try to light fire under Rios. If either Rios or De Aza are in left on opening day, I would think the Sox made a trade for another outfielder.

Irishsox1
02-27-2012, 05:05 PM
I don't even know where to start with Alex Rios. He's been a total bust and he's under a massive contract for 3 more years!

It's not my $32.5 Million but I would rather cut him and play someone younger, than have Rios on the team.

DonnieDarko
02-27-2012, 05:11 PM
...playing Alex Rios in LF? I think that he's much better suited for RF, especially since Viciedo's defense is really, really bad.

DrCrawdad
02-27-2012, 08:18 PM
I saw this Gonzales article (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/ct-spt-0228-white-sox-bits--20120228,0,6348766.story) about the same topic, moving Rios to RF and Tank to LF. I actually like this idea. Isn't it the norm to put the weakest outfielder in LF?

What surprised me though was Gonzales saying that Ozzie had a policy against putting players in positions they weren't comfortable or familiar with. Didn't Ozzie regularly put Rob Mackowiak & Nick Swisher in CF?

Ok, Mackowiak & Swisher may have been familiar and comfortable in CF but neither was good there. They certainly didn't belong there.

Daver
02-27-2012, 08:35 PM
especially since Viciedo's defense is really, really bad.

More like non existent.

kittle42
02-27-2012, 08:36 PM
More like non existent.

At least he wears a glove.

Daver
02-27-2012, 08:38 PM
At least he wears a glove.

He might as well wear it on his head.

Frater Perdurabo
02-27-2012, 08:42 PM
He might as well wear it on his head.

Serious question: Of the various options currently on the roster, would the Sox be better served having Viciedo DH and Dunn play LF?

asindc
02-27-2012, 08:46 PM
Serious question: Of the various options currently on the roster, would the Sox be better served having Viciedo DH and Dunn play LF?

No.

Daver
02-27-2012, 08:49 PM
Serious question: Of the various options currently on the roster, would the Sox be better served having Viciedo DH and Dunn play LF?

Either option would probably be amusing to watch.

Noneck
02-27-2012, 09:35 PM
Serious question: Of the various options currently on the roster, would the Sox be better served having Viciedo DH and Dunn play LF?

Flip a coin.

DSpivack
02-27-2012, 09:51 PM
Serious question: Of the various options currently on the roster, would the Sox be better served having Viciedo DH and Dunn play LF?

Rios at DH, Dunn at 1B, Konerko in CF. For comedic effect.

slavko
02-28-2012, 08:38 AM
Viciedo in the sun field. Gonna be fun at day games.

russ99
02-28-2012, 08:41 AM
Rios would work in RF. He's surely got tons more range than Quentin, and the dropoff in arm strength isn't that bad.

My only issue is if he'd hustle after balls hit in the corner or slowly gait to them after coming off the wall, giving up the extra base(s).

The other question is will De Aza produce enough to hold down the CF role all season. Those winter ball numbers are a bit worrysome. I'd rather Rios stay in one spot, than bounce him around the outfield.