PDA

View Full Version : bring todd ritchie back?


DonkeyKongerko
09-14-2002, 11:00 AM
is this a topic that would incite a flame war? im looking for people to intelligently support or reject this proposition. me, i wouldn't mind bringing todd ritchie back. we all know the post-nardi era has been great for a number of our pitchers. ritchie has been gone for a while and supposedly changed his mechanics (i assume per don cooper). he has little market value and many teams would probably attempt to pick him up as a steal. also it would be pretty hard for him to pitch any worse than last season. i definitely would be one to invite him back for the '03 campaign. lord knows we could use one elder statesman on this pitching staff. might as well pick a guy who's been here for a year already.

doublem23
09-14-2002, 12:06 PM
I'd say the Sox aren't going anywhere, and it appears that Ritchie will be back next season, regardless, so we may as well give him some innings to A) attempt to get his confidence back and B) allow Cooper to watch him in person for extended periods of time and hopefully see if he can find a mechanical problem.

Garbage time is Ritchie time!

:ritchie
Fo sho!

bc2k
09-14-2002, 01:13 PM
I don't know if I can intelligently back up my reasoning Donkey, but I would like to see Ritchie back with the Sox in '03. The first month and a half I really liked the guy. Although his record didn't show it, he gave the team quality starts. If it comes down to Ritchie or Parque, it better be Ritchie.

nut_stock
09-14-2002, 03:23 PM
They might as well give him a shot. He was making something like 3.5 million this year and next year he's arbitration elgible. I'm sure the Sox can win that case, and get him back for less. If he sucks in 03 the Sox wouldn't be out a ton. Also, He was welled liked in Pittsburg and I haven't heard any complaints about him (as a teammate, not performance on field) this year.

DrCrawdad
09-14-2002, 04:40 PM
From what I've read I don't really think there is any question within the Sox org., Ritchie will be back.

Might as well bring Ritchie back for next year. Just don't watch Ritchie get torched game after game. If he's bad, yank him out of the rotation.

Foulke You
09-14-2002, 05:32 PM
Originally posted by bc2k
I don't know if I can intelligently back up my reasoning Donkey, but I would like to see Ritchie back with the Sox in '03. The first month and a half I really liked the guy. Although his record didn't show it, he gave the team quality starts. If it comes down to Ritchie or Parque, it better be Ritchie.

Amen brother. Parque is done except for pitching BP. Ritchie might have some gas left in the ol' arm cannon. If they can get him cheap, it might be worth a try as a #5 guy.

duke of dorwood
09-14-2002, 11:08 PM
The organization's stance on signing pitchers makes signing him again tough. With every team looking for pitchers, its unlikely he would sign the Reinsdorf "incentive" type deal. Being here hasn't exactly been pleasant for him, or us.

Daver
09-14-2002, 11:12 PM
Originally posted by duke of dorwood
The organization's stance on signing pitchers makes signing him again tough. With every team looking for pitchers, its unlikely he would sign the Reinsdorf "incentive" type deal. Being here hasn't exactly been pleasant for him, or us.

They will offer him arbitration and take their chances on getting him back for a 20% reduced salary.

RichH55
09-16-2002, 02:05 PM
Originally posted by daver
They will offer him arbitration and take their chances on getting him back for a 20% reduced salary.


And if Ritchie isnt deserving of a paycut through arbitration well then arbitration simply does not work

hold2dibber
09-16-2002, 02:43 PM
Originally posted by daver
They will offer him arbitration and take their chances on getting him back for a 20% reduced salary.

Is 20% off of his current salary the best you can do (as a team) in arbitration? Because even at 20% off, we're talking about paying him $2.8 million next year. I'm all for bringing Ritchie back, but I sure would rather sign him up to an incentive laden deal that pays him for performance, instead of paying that kind of money for a guy who was a complete flame out this year.

Daver
09-16-2002, 02:46 PM
Originally posted by hold2dibber
Is 20% off of his current salary the best you can do (as a team) in arbitration? Because even at 20% off, we're talking about paying him $2.8 million next year. I'm all for bringing Ritchie back, but I sure would rather sign him up to an incentive laden deal that pays him for performance, instead of paying that kind of money for a guy who was a complete flame out this year.


20% is the max cut through arbitration,the only other alternative would be to not offer him arbitration,then they cannot make him an offer till after May 1st,2003.

hold2dibber
09-16-2002, 06:16 PM
Originally posted by daver
20% is the max cut through arbitration,the only other alternative would be to not offer him arbitration,then they cannot make him an offer till after May 1st,2003.

Thanks. I assume they could also sign him to a new deal (i.e., an incentive-laden deal) prior to the deadline for offering him arbitration?

Daver
09-16-2002, 06:21 PM
Originally posted by hold2dibber
Thanks. I assume they could also sign him to a new deal (i.e., an incentive-laden deal) prior to the deadline for offering him arbitration?

They could sign him to an extension prior to arbitration,but the offer has to be within twenty percent of his current contract,which I am sure his agent would refuse.