Yost said three to four days a week.

No, I don't want him out in the field that often. Unless he gets there as a pinch hitter in late innings when we're already up by more than two runs.

"SF was reportedly going to let him go before the season, and before the trade. I don't know."

That reminds me too much of when I heard Jacobs was going to be released before the Royals traded for him and after posting that I was nearly run off the board here and at the Star.

By the way, I still miss the old Star board and many of its members. Some made it over here but not all of them.

Yeah, I'm not sure why Yost thinks he has some fancy super utility guy when he can't really be sure what the guy can do at two of the positions.
I'd give each of the three guys a day off every 10 games or so. That would put Yuni at 3 games per every 10ish.

As Topeka said, the signing of Yuni was this year's puzzler. A back up infielder is usually selected based upon his abilites defensively. Yuni was known to be adequate at short but an unknown commodity at 3b and 2b. The signing was particularly puzzling as at the time we had three guys in Navarro, Zawadski, and Falu who could have in all likelihood fulfilled a back up infielder role while the debate was if we needed to bring in a veteran with experience at each of the infield positions. And then we got Yuni.

<"SF was reportedly going to let him go before the season, and before the trade. I don't know.">

"That reminds me too much of when I heard Jacobs was going to be released before the Royals traded for him and after posting that I was nearly run off the board here and at the Star."

Such talk is blasphemous on this board and will not be tolerated by the apologist's.They will demand you give name's, phone #'s, home addresses, & those of the closest living relative's, of the source of such blasphemy.

What would reeeeeealy bother you is if DM brings Mike Aviles back. Right?

"What would reeeeeealy bother you is if DM brings Mike Aviles back. Right? "

Absolutely. Only because that would mean you'd return to this board with your senseless drivel.

"Such talk is blasphemous on this board and will not be tolerated by the apologist's.They will demand you give name's, phone #'s, home addresses, & those of the closest living relative's, of the source of such blasphemy."

That's a bit harsh wouldn't you say? If someones going to put out a rumor like that about Sanchez and the Giants then the least they could do is provide a source for it. If you do a search on it you can't find anything saying that the Giants were going to cut Sanchez. Sure you might find a blog speculating on what they will do with their pitching but that is all speculation and not based on reports from the club itself.

I will say that the Giants have a lot of pitching and maybe they would have had to non-tender him if it came to making choices but I wouldn't have bet on that happening. Sanchez is a pitcher who just the prior year pitched in 193 innings with a 3.07 ERA and 205 K's and I doubt many teams give up on this type of pitcher due to a down year because of injuries in 2011. Last year he had an injury plagued season which brought his ERA up to a 4.26 which is his career level. He has a 9.4 K/9 over his career and is 29 years old. I think a more likely scenario would have been they would have kept him and traded him sometime around the trade deadline for prospects if he pitched well.

You are so respected for being sincere. However, taste this for senselessness -

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1099170-boston-red-sox-5-reasons-why-mike-aviles-will-exceed-expectations-at-short#/articles/1099170-boston-red-sox-5-reasons-why-mike-aviles-will-exceed-expectations-at-shor

Hey, while you're around......Did you ever invest in those reading comprehension classes?
Think of the endless hours you could have saved in posting if you only understand what you were reading.

Are you disguising your lack of baseball aptitude by portraying yourself as a writing professor?

My writings were targeted for a demographic comprised of unsophisticated, jaded KC baseball fans, so I kept it simple. Also, I targeted DM and his insiders knowing that they take an occasional peek. We were pleased with our outcome. Go RSN!!!

See what I mean? Your response had nothing to do with reading comprenhsion. You didn't comprehend a post about comprehension.
And I don't say that entirely out of disrespect (only partially). You've just never really understood, or at least been honest about, Royals fans actual feeling about Aviles. You always just make things up.
In other words - for some sick reason - you always wanted Royals fans to hate Aviles. They never did.

As you may be able to persuade yourself by managing to justify any given matter, far greater challenges await you. Simply because it will be too late when you reach the point of acknowledging your shortcomings. By this time you will reflect on many of your oversights and understand that all along I tried to show you the light.

This board exercised their right to voice opinions regarding Aviles and I read many of them. This is an issue not of hate, but of opportunity. Tony Pena was given an opportunity and so were many others. To translate opportunity for you, imagine being a dog tied to a fence and your leash is changed from a short one to longer one, but never taken off. Its called restrictions- When you are restricted, you are limited. Who needs that?

I always understood, never wanted fans to hate, did not make things up and tried to take out of your darkness. Go KC !!!

Ahh, another mistake you've always made. Thinking a poll on a message board could lead to more playing time for Aviles. You live in a stange land. And I've fed you enough for today - more than I should have.
Hopefully Aviles does a good job for Boston this year in his utility role.

You know, since Aviles was drafted in 2003, and Tony Pena took a powder rather early in 2005, exactly when did Pena have the opportunity to see the greatness that was to be in Mike Aviles?