What caused the Sox to walk away from Orlando Cabrera
What were the whispers?
#1
dag2000
Posted 11 September 2007 - 03:32 PM
With Derek Lowe, we all knew about his boozy philandering or, at least, we knew about it eventually. But Orlando Cabrera was never mentioned on the Herald's Inside Track and, to my knoweldge, was never seen at Emerson College parties.
What in the hell happened?
#6
rominer
Posted 11 September 2007 - 05:00 PM
But if this one is true, it's not that surprising:
The age of consent in Colombia is 14.
14! That's ridiculous. But that's where he's from. I'm not saying it's a valid excuse or adequate justification...but people are to a large extent products of the culture in which they're raised. :o
#7
DCA
Posted 11 September 2007 - 05:20 PM
rominer, on Sep 11 2007, 05:56 PM, said:
But if this one is true, it's not that surprising:
The age of consent in Colombia is 14.
14! That's ridiculous. But that's where he's from. I'm not saying it's a valid excuse or adequate justification...but people are to a large extent products of the culture in which they're raised. :o
Shouldn't have posted this. Start looking to the left boys. Me thinks you'll see more and more of the posters coming from Colombia soon. Starting with pioneer GONM
This post has been edited by DCA: 11 September 2007 - 05:21 PM
#8
MFLetou
Posted 11 September 2007 - 07:49 PM
rominer, on Sep 11 2007, 05:56 PM, said:
But if this one is true, it's not that surprising:
The age of consent in Colombia is 14.
14! That's ridiculous. But that's where he's from. I'm not saying it's a valid excuse or adequate justification...but people are to a large extent products of the culture in which they're raised. :o
Ok there Billy Martin---(the lawyer, not the manager).
#10
alskor
Posted 11 September 2007 - 10:50 PM
gerky, on Sep 11 2007, 04:47 PM, said:
Same thing. Heard from multiple sources from/about BC chicks that he tried to get to come home with him on game nights. Word is he was quite a partier/drinker. Can't confirm it obviously, but many people seem to have anecdotal evidence of this. I still like the guy anyway, but it was a strike against him for obvious reasons, and considering the atmosphere of the team at the time and the direction they wanted to take it.
Fun player to watch and nice guy though. He really improved himself after leaving here, too, and that wasnt a given. The best years of his career were post-2004, so its not a decision that was a no brainer. He looked like an all glove/no bat guy. He seriously stepped up at the plate in the last few years and put together some really nice seasons. Everything would have been better for us in hindsight if he had stayed, but this wasnt the only possible outcome. If we keep him you can't say he would have taken that step forward, for instance... there was more than one possible outcome, and although it turned out bad for us I really cant fault the decision making process here. OC had some risk to him and the money he wanted was very pricey for the type of player he profiled as at the time.
#11
yazgoesbacklooksupitsgone
Posted 11 September 2007 - 11:14 PM
Always better to act first than react later.
#12
rominer
Posted 11 September 2007 - 11:47 PM
MFLetou, on Sep 11 2007, 05:45 PM, said:
Well, no. I'm not going the Michael Vick route.
Just saying that, as vices go, it wouldn't be surprising to see a guy be shaped by his cultural experience. Like it wouldn't be shocking to meet a drunk Irishman, or a drunk, brawling Scotsman, or a person from L.A.'s "inland empire" who has a meth lab in their garage.
Not making the "therefore it's ok" leap. Just the "therefore it's not that surprising" leap.
#13
john dopson
Posted 12 September 2007 - 02:26 AM
#14
alskor
Posted 12 September 2007 - 02:39 AM
john dopson, on Sep 12 2007, 03:22 AM, said:
I dont know if youre being serious or not, but the difference was an isolated incident over which Lugo was cleared as opposed to a repetitive pattern of behavior that was troublesome. I think the Lugo incident did concern them though, and IIRC they made comments when he was signed that they had investigated it and were satisfied that he was a good character guy.
I personally think both Lugo and OC are good character/good clubhouse guys from what I can tell. I like the way they both play with energy. I think it was a reasonable decision to walk away from OC though given the uncertainty at the time, both on field and off. Another thing to consider is that OC was replaced by Renteria, a player they liked more(entirely different conversation) and who they thought was a better investment than "overpaying" OC. This last offseason we needed a SS and it was essentially Lugo or bust. I think that had a lot more to do with the decision making than character issues did. Not that they need to be consistent anyway. Theo was still a little green following the 04 season. I would hope he learned some lessons and changed his strategy a bit since then. Perhaps OC's success was a reason they werent worried about Lugo...
EDIT: I know Im editing this a day later, but I saw that I misspelled "repetitive" badly and I just couldnt leave it like that.
This post has been edited by alskor: 12 September 2007 - 04:53 PM
#15
john dopson
Posted 12 September 2007 - 04:07 AM
when the woman backs down, there's no case.
I'm still not sure I buy his "innocence" (and I'm not the only one) but that's another matter for another day.
I'm not in the Sox front office (and neither is anyone else on this board) so for anyone to say they "know" what happened is a major stretch.
without more info, I chalk it up to a baseball decision; they apparently didn't think OC was worth 4/32 and thought they could do better.
and they were wrong.
it happens.
This post has been edited by john dopson: 12 September 2007 - 04:08 AM
#16
MargoAdamsLoveChild
Posted 12 September 2007 - 12:01 PM
john dopson, on Sep 12 2007, 05:03 AM, said:
without more info, I chalk it up to a baseball decision; they apparently didn't think OC was worth 4/32 and thought they could do better.
and they were wrong.
it happens.
Actually, they were right, but they panicked and unloaded Edgar Renteria after one bad year. But that's not the point of the thread.
#17
john dopson
Posted 12 September 2007 - 05:48 PM
but it's amazing the amount of work, money and prospects that have gone into replacing OC.
and you could argue he's still as good or better than anyone else they've tried to replace him with.
#18
Harry Bobbin Manass
Posted 12 September 2007 - 08:35 PM
john dopson, on Sep 12 2007, 05:03 AM, said:
and they were wrong. it happens.
Draft picks were also part of the equation. Letting O-Cab go netted them two high picks, which they used to take Jacoby Ellsbury and Jed Lowrie. Signing Renteria cost them one pick, which the Cards used to take Colby Rasmus. When you combine that with a pretty reasonable analysis that Renteria was the better player, it made sense as a baseball decision.
#19
kylexray
Posted 03 October 2008 - 03:01 PM
http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/reds...as/extra_bases/
Don't you think you manage your interest while you are taking down $10,000,000 a year?
#20
RicardoAceto
Posted 15 March 2011 - 10:54 AM
I don't know the hell happened to then but i want them to see in the next championship.

Sign In »
Register Now!
Help

MultiQuote