<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Evan Longoria Demotion Debate</title>
	<atom:link href="http://riveraveblues.com/2008/03/26/the-evan-longoria-demotion-debate-2401/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://riveraveblues.com/2008/03/26/the-evan-longoria-demotion-debate-2401/</link>
	<description>A New York Yankees Blog</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 16:30:43 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6</generator>
	<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: Bob R.</title>
		<link>http://riveraveblues.com/2008/03/26/the-evan-longoria-demotion-debate-2401/#comment-59981</link>
		<dc:creator>Bob R.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2008 02:37:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://riveraveblues.com/2008/03/26/the-evan-longoria-demotion-debate-2401/#comment-59981</guid>
		<description>If you think the Rays' blogs have some consensus on the issue, you are not reading the right ones. In fact, even at Rays of Light there are dissenting views, and on some blogs the opinion is either evenly divided or very much in favor of the move.

As a matter of fact, the Rays are doing exactly the right thing with Longoria, and the fact they are doing it in the face of some obvious backlash (and I stress "some"), it is proof not of foolishness or stinginess but of courage to stay with a clear and rational plan for building a consistent contender. It is not simply that Longoria can only benefit from more AAA time, no matter what ill-informed and long distance analysts think or for that matter what his own teammates think (there are many explanations for their statements), but also that the separation of business decisions from baseball decisions is artificial. They are intimately related and only by making smart business decisions can any team, and that includes the Yankees, hope to compete effectively. 

I suggest you check DRays Bay and Rays Anatomy to find more rational discussion of the issue. I also suggest that before pronouncing on motives of the Rays' management, you study more carefully their activities for the past two years, activities that clearly demonstrate their commitment to winning and willingness to do what is necessary to reach that goal. Considering the generally emotional and short-sighted views of a few fans is hardly useful in forming an opinion of what the Rays are accomplishing.

Incidentally, Hank Steinbrenner's statements about revenue sharing were about as asinine as anyone can imagine. He was not just making an entirely irrelevant point at the time, but was addressing it to the wrong people.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If you think the Rays&#8217; blogs have some consensus on the issue, you are not reading the right ones. In fact, even at Rays of Light there are dissenting views, and on some blogs the opinion is either evenly divided or very much in favor of the move.</p>
<p>As a matter of fact, the Rays are doing exactly the right thing with Longoria, and the fact they are doing it in the face of some obvious backlash (and I stress &#8220;some&#8221;), it is proof not of foolishness or stinginess but of courage to stay with a clear and rational plan for building a consistent contender. It is not simply that Longoria can only benefit from more AAA time, no matter what ill-informed and long distance analysts think or for that matter what his own teammates think (there are many explanations for their statements), but also that the separation of business decisions from baseball decisions is artificial. They are intimately related and only by making smart business decisions can any team, and that includes the Yankees, hope to compete effectively. </p>
<p>I suggest you check DRays Bay and Rays Anatomy to find more rational discussion of the issue. I also suggest that before pronouncing on motives of the Rays&#8217; management, you study more carefully their activities for the past two years, activities that clearly demonstrate their commitment to winning and willingness to do what is necessary to reach that goal. Considering the generally emotional and short-sighted views of a few fans is hardly useful in forming an opinion of what the Rays are accomplishing.</p>
<p>Incidentally, Hank Steinbrenner&#8217;s statements about revenue sharing were about as asinine as anyone can imagine. He was not just making an entirely irrelevant point at the time, but was addressing it to the wrong people.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eric SanInocencio</title>
		<link>http://riveraveblues.com/2008/03/26/the-evan-longoria-demotion-debate-2401/#comment-59926</link>
		<dc:creator>Eric SanInocencio</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Mar 2008 21:19:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://riveraveblues.com/2008/03/26/the-evan-longoria-demotion-debate-2401/#comment-59926</guid>
		<description>What the Rays front office is trying to build is a sustained competition for the next decade. I can’t imagine that in the midst of all this planning they’d succumb to emotions and entertain an extra two months of Evan Longoria. I’m not advocating Evan not playing this season, but just that fans and management wait until Memorial Day.

If you do that, then in 2014 you’ll have Evan Longoria reaching his peak seasons while penciled into the middle of your order. At age 27, one has to think that he’ll be better than he is right now. More mature, stronger and capable of putting up better numbers. 

Couple that with then ace David Price, and you have a team full of blue chip players on the field, not just in the prospect books. While they may not be the team we recognize today, it will still presumably have more a chance to compete for a championship than the 2008 version.

http://mvn.com/mlb-rays/2008/03/21/longoria-should-start-in-triple-a/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What the Rays front office is trying to build is a sustained competition for the next decade. I can’t imagine that in the midst of all this planning they’d succumb to emotions and entertain an extra two months of Evan Longoria. I’m not advocating Evan not playing this season, but just that fans and management wait until Memorial Day.</p>
<p>If you do that, then in 2014 you’ll have Evan Longoria reaching his peak seasons while penciled into the middle of your order. At age 27, one has to think that he’ll be better than he is right now. More mature, stronger and capable of putting up better numbers. </p>
<p>Couple that with then ace David Price, and you have a team full of blue chip players on the field, not just in the prospect books. While they may not be the team we recognize today, it will still presumably have more a chance to compete for a championship than the 2008 version.</p>
<p><a href="http://mvn.com/mlb-rays/2008/03/21/longoria-should-start-in-triple-a/" rel="nofollow">http://mvn.com/mlb-rays/2008/0.....-triple-a/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sciorsci</title>
		<link>http://riveraveblues.com/2008/03/26/the-evan-longoria-demotion-debate-2401/#comment-59916</link>
		<dc:creator>Sciorsci</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Mar 2008 20:19:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://riveraveblues.com/2008/03/26/the-evan-longoria-demotion-debate-2401/#comment-59916</guid>
		<description>No, I don't think they'll make the postseason this season, regardless of whether Longoria plays 160 games or 120 games.  That's been part of my argument all along.  I think you might be confusing my point with the exact opposite of what I've been trying to say.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No, I don&#8217;t think they&#8217;ll make the postseason this season, regardless of whether Longoria plays 160 games or 120 games.  That&#8217;s been part of my argument all along.  I think you might be confusing my point with the exact opposite of what I&#8217;ve been trying to say.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ceciguante</title>
		<link>http://riveraveblues.com/2008/03/26/the-evan-longoria-demotion-debate-2401/#comment-59880</link>
		<dc:creator>ceciguante</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Mar 2008 18:17:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://riveraveblues.com/2008/03/26/the-evan-longoria-demotion-debate-2401/#comment-59880</guid>
		<description>it may not taste good to rays fans or their other players who want to believe that they are playing for this october, but as a management decision they just upped longoria's value by waiting 6 or 7 weeks to bring him up.  for all the talk on this blog about how hughes is a better bet than santana b/c of the # of years the yanks have him under control for cheap, i'm surprised there is no similar appreciation of the rays converting ~7 weeks of replacement value performance into a whole extra year of control over longoria.  it's a no brainer management decision, not an issue of revenue sharing.  this is the best move for the rays organization, the big payroll teams shouldn't knock it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>it may not taste good to rays fans or their other players who want to believe that they are playing for this october, but as a management decision they just upped longoria&#8217;s value by waiting 6 or 7 weeks to bring him up.  for all the talk on this blog about how hughes is a better bet than santana b/c of the # of years the yanks have him under control for cheap, i&#8217;m surprised there is no similar appreciation of the rays converting ~7 weeks of replacement value performance into a whole extra year of control over longoria.  it&#8217;s a no brainer management decision, not an issue of revenue sharing.  this is the best move for the rays organization, the big payroll teams shouldn&#8217;t knock it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Curramba</title>
		<link>http://riveraveblues.com/2008/03/26/the-evan-longoria-demotion-debate-2401/#comment-59872</link>
		<dc:creator>Curramba</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Mar 2008 17:29:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://riveraveblues.com/2008/03/26/the-evan-longoria-demotion-debate-2401/#comment-59872</guid>
		<description>Sciorsci,
Do you honestly think that the Rays with or without Longoria will make the PS this year?  If your answer to that is no, then the obvious choice is to leave the kid in the minors for a month and slow down his FA clock.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sciorsci,<br />
Do you honestly think that the Rays with or without Longoria will make the PS this year?  If your answer to that is no, then the obvious choice is to leave the kid in the minors for a month and slow down his FA clock.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sciorsci</title>
		<link>http://riveraveblues.com/2008/03/26/the-evan-longoria-demotion-debate-2401/#comment-59850</link>
		<dc:creator>Sciorsci</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:46:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://riveraveblues.com/2008/03/26/the-evan-longoria-demotion-debate-2401/#comment-59850</guid>
		<description>That last comment was in response to CB's 10:57am post.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That last comment was in response to CB&#8217;s 10:57am post.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sciorsci</title>
		<link>http://riveraveblues.com/2008/03/26/the-evan-longoria-demotion-debate-2401/#comment-59849</link>
		<dc:creator>Sciorsci</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:45:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://riveraveblues.com/2008/03/26/the-evan-longoria-demotion-debate-2401/#comment-59849</guid>
		<description>You're right.  They could just try to bury the kid until he's closer to his prime-age years, but the Rule V draft exists to make sure that doesn't happen.  Also, part of reaching a player's prime does require the learning curve of playing against MLB competition.  But the idea that a month of learning curve development for a 21-year-old rookie (even one as polished as Longoria) is somehow more valuable than a year of production out of a 27-year-old potential star is extremely short-sighted, in my opinion.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You&#8217;re right.  They could just try to bury the kid until he&#8217;s closer to his prime-age years, but the Rule V draft exists to make sure that doesn&#8217;t happen.  Also, part of reaching a player&#8217;s prime does require the learning curve of playing against MLB competition.  But the idea that a month of learning curve development for a 21-year-old rookie (even one as polished as Longoria) is somehow more valuable than a year of production out of a 27-year-old potential star is extremely short-sighted, in my opinion.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sciorsci</title>
		<link>http://riveraveblues.com/2008/03/26/the-evan-longoria-demotion-debate-2401/#comment-59848</link>
		<dc:creator>Sciorsci</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:41:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://riveraveblues.com/2008/03/26/the-evan-longoria-demotion-debate-2401/#comment-59848</guid>
		<description>Of course you can say they're changing the organizational culture.  Previously, they've brought up guys like Baldelli (though that's an unfortunate situation), Crawford, even Young and Dukes, as soon as they deemed them MLB-ready.  

Now, they're exhibiting more of a long-range plan, and they're still be criticized for it.  They are likely aiming to truly compete in 2010 or so (when their young arms will catch up to their young bats, theoretically).  From that point on, their budget will likely only give them a finite number of years within which to contend.  Why sacrifice a year of prime-age production from one of their potential stars during that window of opportunity to satisfy a fickle fan base in April/May before that window of competitiveness really begins?  It doesn't make any sense.

Also, don't underestimate the additional pressure of starting the season with the MLB club, versus starting in AAA and being called up early in the season.  I keep using the example of Ryan Braun vs. Alex Gordon.  While it's easy now to claim that Braun's superior production might be the result of better talent, that's not what most people thought a year ago.  But Braun was allowed to start in Nashville, have some additional success at the AAA level, and then join a Milwaukee team that was already doing well.  As such, he was asked to contribute, rather than carry the team.  Gordon, on the other hand, didn't really get his feet under him until June anyway.  April and May were wasted months for him, and what's Kansas City's reward?  They get to deal with his impending free agency a year earlier.

Revenue sharing or not, economics are an issue for 80% of MLB teams.  It's not like the Rays are going to just use 8 hitters and not have a 3B in the field; 21-year-old rookie Longoria's value for 6 weeks relative to a replacement-level player will probably not be a huge difference.  Even if it amounts to a few games (and that's being generous), this season should be more about building a foundation for the team going forward, not trying to somehow topple the two biggest franchises in the sport ahead of schedule.

Whether or not Friedman and/or Maddon are being somewhat disingenuous about their reasons for sending Longoria down (I'm sure there actually are some very good baseball-related reasons for wanting the kid to see more AAA pitching; to continue the Braun analogy, he was pretty polished himself coming out of UM), this is the right decision.  The Rays may not be a better team in 2008 as a result of Longoria starting the season in Durham, but they'll be a better franchise over the next 5-10 years as a result of making smart personnel decisions that will allow them to keep their core talent together long enough simultaneously to contend in a division that will never be easy to compete in.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Of course you can say they&#8217;re changing the organizational culture.  Previously, they&#8217;ve brought up guys like Baldelli (though that&#8217;s an unfortunate situation), Crawford, even Young and Dukes, as soon as they deemed them MLB-ready.  </p>
<p>Now, they&#8217;re exhibiting more of a long-range plan, and they&#8217;re still be criticized for it.  They are likely aiming to truly compete in 2010 or so (when their young arms will catch up to their young bats, theoretically).  From that point on, their budget will likely only give them a finite number of years within which to contend.  Why sacrifice a year of prime-age production from one of their potential stars during that window of opportunity to satisfy a fickle fan base in April/May before that window of competitiveness really begins?  It doesn&#8217;t make any sense.</p>
<p>Also, don&#8217;t underestimate the additional pressure of starting the season with the MLB club, versus starting in AAA and being called up early in the season.  I keep using the example of Ryan Braun vs. Alex Gordon.  While it&#8217;s easy now to claim that Braun&#8217;s superior production might be the result of better talent, that&#8217;s not what most people thought a year ago.  But Braun was allowed to start in Nashville, have some additional success at the AAA level, and then join a Milwaukee team that was already doing well.  As such, he was asked to contribute, rather than carry the team.  Gordon, on the other hand, didn&#8217;t really get his feet under him until June anyway.  April and May were wasted months for him, and what&#8217;s Kansas City&#8217;s reward?  They get to deal with his impending free agency a year earlier.</p>
<p>Revenue sharing or not, economics are an issue for 80% of MLB teams.  It&#8217;s not like the Rays are going to just use 8 hitters and not have a 3B in the field; 21-year-old rookie Longoria&#8217;s value for 6 weeks relative to a replacement-level player will probably not be a huge difference.  Even if it amounts to a few games (and that&#8217;s being generous), this season should be more about building a foundation for the team going forward, not trying to somehow topple the two biggest franchises in the sport ahead of schedule.</p>
<p>Whether or not Friedman and/or Maddon are being somewhat disingenuous about their reasons for sending Longoria down (I&#8217;m sure there actually are some very good baseball-related reasons for wanting the kid to see more AAA pitching; to continue the Braun analogy, he was pretty polished himself coming out of UM), this is the right decision.  The Rays may not be a better team in 2008 as a result of Longoria starting the season in Durham, but they&#8217;ll be a better franchise over the next 5-10 years as a result of making smart personnel decisions that will allow them to keep their core talent together long enough simultaneously to contend in a division that will never be easy to compete in.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: CB</title>
		<link>http://riveraveblues.com/2008/03/26/the-evan-longoria-demotion-debate-2401/#comment-59841</link>
		<dc:creator>CB</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:57:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://riveraveblues.com/2008/03/26/the-evan-longoria-demotion-debate-2401/#comment-59841</guid>
		<description>That's the thing.  Why should the Rays bring up Longoria at all this season?  If they want to get the best 6 years of Longoria's early career during the period in which they will be more competitive they could just keep him in the  minors until next may.  

They'll likely be better next year than this year.  That way they can control him until 2016.  At some point there's no end to this type of thinking.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That&#8217;s the thing.  Why should the Rays bring up Longoria at all this season?  If they want to get the best 6 years of Longoria&#8217;s early career during the period in which they will be more competitive they could just keep him in the  minors until next may.  </p>
<p>They&#8217;ll likely be better next year than this year.  That way they can control him until 2016.  At some point there&#8217;s no end to this type of thinking.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: boones</title>
		<link>http://riveraveblues.com/2008/03/26/the-evan-longoria-demotion-debate-2401/#comment-59840</link>
		<dc:creator>boones</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:49:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://riveraveblues.com/2008/03/26/the-evan-longoria-demotion-debate-2401/#comment-59840</guid>
		<description>Rays = Smart</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Rays = Smart</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
