The '13 driver transfer discussion/speculation thread op updated 16/10
- Thread starter F1 fan
- 2,521 comments
- 157,046 views
- Status
The Outlaw
Premium
- 3,042
- Bay Area, California
- GTP_timeattack
I certainly agree with that
But it's even more seemingly petty/semantical when you turn a blind eye to relatively baseless train of thought (that Raikkonen is clearly a better choice for Ferrari than Massa), and rather correct (something that has absolutely nothing to do with the main message presented) someone's exact wording when they say, "when Raikkonen left Ferrari." You're splitting hairs mate.
The Outlaw
Premium
- 3,042
- Bay Area, California
- GTP_timeattack
Fair enough 👍 I shall take your advice
- 3,207
I know, I probably should have used "decent possibility of not being" instead of "probably nowhere near", but I wanted to drive the point home with HKS. He has clearly shown that he expects Kimi to beat, or at least match, Alonso and I found him endorsing your post a bit strange when your post alluded to the evidence (as un-solid as it is) that doesn't necessarily favour Kimi doing any better than Massa against Alonso.I didn't neccesarily suggest that. Rather that maybe Massa just never had the raw ability to take on Alonso, despite him having great "results" (which can be quite vague when judging a drivers ability) when teamed up together with Kimi. Instead it seems like some people constantly like to come up with excuses (he was never the same driver after his accident, Alonso has all the support, etc.) as to why Massa hasn't been able to compete with Alonso points wise.
Again, this all goes back to zippy saying Ferrari would be crazy not to drop Massa for Kimi. Personally, I'd rather wait and see how Kimi performs against Alonso, rather than stating it as some well know fact that Kimi will do much better than Massa has, when the most grounded evidence (not hand picking for this or that excuse for Massa or Raikkonene) we have in hand (Kimi/Massa 07-09) suggest otherwise!
This will be my last post regarding this topic...time to move on
But you're right, many are making assumptions where there should be more questions. Next year will answer certain questions and paint a better picture of past performances from Massa, Kimi and Raikkonen. I personally think Kimi might be a Button, Rosberg, Webber level of driver (which is still very good!) that has benefited from fast cars/average teammates bloating his reputation. I look forward to seeing how he sizes up against Alonso, perhaps he can surpass my expectations. Of course what happens next year won't answer all my questions about his past performance (and I expect excuses to fly from fans of both sides of the Ferrari garage), but at least it will be more clear that it is now.
The Alonso-Kimi battle is also interesting in completely different way, because if Kimi can get close to Alonso, it'll illustrate just how monstrous Michael Schumacher was (and how well Barrichello did to not be completely blown away by him).
- 2,976
- Curitiba
- 22,551
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
Well I knew I was going to be wrong because I didn't want Kimi to go back to that crap, but I was wrong.
Nico to Lotus is my prediction now.
Perhaps you misunderstood, I'm not saying that I want Massa to stay but to bring it down to "you have two options" who is GTB to make that claim or anyone really. It probably isn't that simple, nothing in F1 usually is. I know what started the argument but it had nothing to do with me defending Zippy so not sure what context you're working from.
Once again what are you reading into? I never said Alonso wasn't the best, I show that he was based on his 2 WDC and the fact that he is quick. My point which you clearly missed, was that Ferrari had no reason to support Massa after the injury because as you've said and what I originally said that went beyond you. They had no reason to support Massa beyond anything more than a support role, because they had their golden child in Fernando and the feats he had achieved prior, and the fact that he could still do so.
How exactly is it wrong to make such a conclusion it's easy to surmise and say something with out giving a counter example into how it should be done.
It's fine to look at the fact that Massa was quite fast and more so faster than Kimi, even before the accident in 2009. So then we must ask well why was there a downfall in performance? We know Massa was fast in good cars and could compete with other highly fast cars and we know the 2010 car was fast. So why couldn't he muster more than what he did? One could look at circumstantial evidence that the accident probably did more harm than Massa was willing to admit due to the team and the sport he worked in. One doesn't come back and say "well I'm okay or perhaps 70-80%". Especially, working for Ferrari that probably wouldn't get a very well received welcome back. There is no concrete evidence that one can point at to why Felipe fell off the pace but it is a safe bet to say diminishing/lack of help from the team at large probably played a role. Don't confuse it though as if I'm taking away Alonso's talent just because Ferrari clearly shifted full support to Alonso, if anything Ferrari has failed both guys at times but trying telling Ferrari that.
Also I wont lose any sleep over Felipe being gone, I'm quite happy to see him go.
If you say it was partially the reason then, it wasn't the full reason as you seemed to imply earlier. There is clearly other factors to him getting the seat (e.g. a massive sponsor).
Well wait if Esteban deserved the seat and has this talent then how does he now become an questionable driver to compare with Nico? How does PDR who had been in the car as long as Nico and said in the same car he'd beat Vettel, but couldn't beat Hulkenburg. Well now it suggest that you have conflicting interest, you can't say the guy deserves to be in F1 but "not F1 caliber" it as if you don't even know what you want.
So you yield instead. Well thanks.
Nico to Lotus is my prediction now.
Perhaps you misunderstood, I'm not saying that I want Massa to stay but to bring it down to "you have two options" who is GTB to make that claim or anyone really. It probably isn't that simple, nothing in F1 usually is. I know what started the argument but it had nothing to do with me defending Zippy so not sure what context you're working from.
Once again what are you reading into? I never said Alonso wasn't the best, I show that he was based on his 2 WDC and the fact that he is quick. My point which you clearly missed, was that Ferrari had no reason to support Massa after the injury because as you've said and what I originally said that went beyond you. They had no reason to support Massa beyond anything more than a support role, because they had their golden child in Fernando and the feats he had achieved prior, and the fact that he could still do so.
How exactly is it wrong to make such a conclusion it's easy to surmise and say something with out giving a counter example into how it should be done.
It's fine to look at the fact that Massa was quite fast and more so faster than Kimi, even before the accident in 2009. So then we must ask well why was there a downfall in performance? We know Massa was fast in good cars and could compete with other highly fast cars and we know the 2010 car was fast. So why couldn't he muster more than what he did? One could look at circumstantial evidence that the accident probably did more harm than Massa was willing to admit due to the team and the sport he worked in. One doesn't come back and say "well I'm okay or perhaps 70-80%". Especially, working for Ferrari that probably wouldn't get a very well received welcome back. There is no concrete evidence that one can point at to why Felipe fell off the pace but it is a safe bet to say diminishing/lack of help from the team at large probably played a role. Don't confuse it though as if I'm taking away Alonso's talent just because Ferrari clearly shifted full support to Alonso, if anything Ferrari has failed both guys at times but trying telling Ferrari that.
Also I wont lose any sleep over Felipe being gone, I'm quite happy to see him go.
If you say it was partially the reason then, it wasn't the full reason as you seemed to imply earlier. There is clearly other factors to him getting the seat (e.g. a massive sponsor).
Well wait if Esteban deserved the seat and has this talent then how does he now become an questionable driver to compare with Nico? How does PDR who had been in the car as long as Nico and said in the same car he'd beat Vettel, but couldn't beat Hulkenburg. Well now it suggest that you have conflicting interest, you can't say the guy deserves to be in F1 but "not F1 caliber" it as if you don't even know what you want.
So you yield instead. Well thanks.
Last edited:
- 2,376
- Stockholm, Swe
- GTP_Anghammarad
Hmm, Rosberg to Lotus and Alonso to Mercedes for a 2007 rematch... 
Anyway, I don't think anyone disagrees that Räikkönen is more talented than Massa. The fact that Massa outperformed him when they were teammates was probably because Kimi was fed up with the circus. He seems to be in a happier and more comfortable place mentally now. I still don't think that he will be better than Alonso. Sure, raw talentwise he probably has the edge but Alonsos sheer persistence and stamina will most likely land him ahead in the WDC even if they are on equal terms.
Anyway, I don't think anyone disagrees that Räikkönen is more talented than Massa. The fact that Massa outperformed him when they were teammates was probably because Kimi was fed up with the circus. He seems to be in a happier and more comfortable place mentally now. I still don't think that he will be better than Alonso. Sure, raw talentwise he probably has the edge but Alonsos sheer persistence and stamina will most likely land him ahead in the WDC even if they are on equal terms.
Last edited:
- 2,976
- Curitiba
By that time, Massa was another driver. He was confident, was the Schummy guy who inherited Ferrari. And that's huge.
Besides, without much pressure on him, he managed a very good 2006 season and all this things gave him confidence to race against Raikkonen.
That particular moment was the pinnacle of his relationship with Ferrari, a relationship that goes back to 2001, when he signed the team and ended up in Sauber.
- 29,378
- Glasgow
- GTP_Mars
The Outlaw
Premium
- 3,042
- Bay Area, California
- GTP_timeattack
Last post, then I'm done with this flat tire topic....I swear
Hmm, well I never said or implied that you wanted Massa to stay anyway. I initially responded to your original post on this manner, mainly because I didn't see why you bothered to pick apart GTB's post questioning/expanding upon how zippy came to his conclusion, when the original point made by zippy (that Raikkonen is clearly a better option than Massa) was taken a level further when it came to flawed logic and inadequate evidence. Not to mention that he even said something along the lines of, what we see from Massa nowadays was even on display back in 2008 (a year where Massa was a solid match for Raikkonen), yet Raikkonen is clearly a great replacement for Massa...based on what I don't really have a clue.
The main problem is that zippy never responded to what GTB laid out in front of him, instead you jumped in with the bag of excuses to try and nullify the counter evidence to zippy's relatively bold claim, and contradictory basis of thinking.
This idea that as soon as Fernando signed with Ferrari, Massa automatically became the forgotten child (before Ferrari could even see which driver was genuinely stronger on track) is a pure assumption though, and looking for excuses again as to why Felipe hasn't been as successful as he once was. To me, this just seems like another one of those typical excuses some use to nullify/dodge the results from 07-09, and what these results suggest when it comes to comparing Massa and Kimi...in a Ferrari coincidentally.
Not only that, but exactly what "support" from the team has he been lacking in order to be as good as he once was??
Here's where your logic and basis of thinking is flawed though. Who's to say there ever was a downfall in Massa's actual driving ability, but rather just a downfall when it came to results (because of competiton around him being stronger quite possibly). You see a downfall in his results relative to pre-2010 and then think that this automatically equates to him just losing his actual ability, which is a bit short sided....and again making assumptions and trying to pass them off as fact.
And how exactly do you quantify a drivers ability or exactly how fast/strong a car is when you say such vague things as "Massa was fast in good cars and could compete with other highly fast car and we know the 2010 car was fast."
I certainly thought of that and agree with that view. But I like to go off what I do know, rather than assuming things based off circumstantial evidence to arrive at an answer my heart feels is right. Rather in this case, I've used the most solid evidence (the results from Kimi/Massa pairing in 07-09) I could find when it came to comparing Felipe and Kimi's abilities at this day and age. It's certainly far from exact, but better than any other assumptions and excuses I've seen.
Again, I don't understand how you can blatantly assume that Felipe just fell off the pace (which in this context, would have to be relative to what he was capable of before). Do you have access to Ferrari's telemetry/data acquisition and see a clear decline in his ability to maximize the car or something? Or has Ferrari's so called diminishing support turned him from a WDC contendor into a F1 reject?
Hmm, well I never said or implied that you wanted Massa to stay anyway. I initially responded to your original post on this manner, mainly because I didn't see why you bothered to pick apart GTB's post questioning/expanding upon how zippy came to his conclusion, when the original point made by zippy (that Raikkonen is clearly a better option than Massa) was taken a level further when it came to flawed logic and inadequate evidence. Not to mention that he even said something along the lines of, what we see from Massa nowadays was even on display back in 2008 (a year where Massa was a solid match for Raikkonen), yet Raikkonen is clearly a great replacement for Massa...based on what I don't really have a clue.
The main problem is that zippy never responded to what GTB laid out in front of him, instead you jumped in with the bag of excuses to try and nullify the counter evidence to zippy's relatively bold claim, and contradictory basis of thinking.
This idea that as soon as Fernando signed with Ferrari, Massa automatically became the forgotten child (before Ferrari could even see which driver was genuinely stronger on track) is a pure assumption though, and looking for excuses again as to why Felipe hasn't been as successful as he once was. To me, this just seems like another one of those typical excuses some use to nullify/dodge the results from 07-09, and what these results suggest when it comes to comparing Massa and Kimi...in a Ferrari coincidentally.
Not only that, but exactly what "support" from the team has he been lacking in order to be as good as he once was??
Here's where your logic and basis of thinking is flawed though. Who's to say there ever was a downfall in Massa's actual driving ability, but rather just a downfall when it came to results (because of competiton around him being stronger quite possibly). You see a downfall in his results relative to pre-2010 and then think that this automatically equates to him just losing his actual ability, which is a bit short sided....and again making assumptions and trying to pass them off as fact.
And how exactly do you quantify a drivers ability or exactly how fast/strong a car is when you say such vague things as "Massa was fast in good cars and could compete with other highly fast car and we know the 2010 car was fast."
I certainly thought of that and agree with that view. But I like to go off what I do know, rather than assuming things based off circumstantial evidence to arrive at an answer my heart feels is right. Rather in this case, I've used the most solid evidence (the results from Kimi/Massa pairing in 07-09) I could find when it came to comparing Felipe and Kimi's abilities at this day and age. It's certainly far from exact, but better than any other assumptions and excuses I've seen.
Again, I don't understand how you can blatantly assume that Felipe just fell off the pace (which in this context, would have to be relative to what he was capable of before). Do you have access to Ferrari's telemetry/data acquisition and see a clear decline in his ability to maximize the car or something? Or has Ferrari's so called diminishing support turned him from a WDC contendor into a F1 reject?
HKS racer
(Banned)
- 4,802
I think Kimi is better than Button, Rosberg and Webber. Kimi is the 4th best driver in the world. Top 3 (in random order) are Alonso Vettel Hamilton. With Outlaw I was agreeing about Massa not being at Alonso level, and explained why Kimi didn't had a good 2008 season. Kimi were main competitor in 2005 for Alonso he lost the champ because of McLaren unrelaibility but he showed a raw pace only very few drivers have. 2007 was simply legendary. 2008 had some bad luck and lack of motivation, 2009 bad car but he won an amazing race at Spa. 2012, 2013 fantastic results with a LOTUS.
Alonso in other hand, 2 times World Champ, let's not forget it, came 2nd by a point in 2007 and lost 2010 and 2012 championship for unfortunate incidents and team mistakes. Alonso is sort of modern Mansell/Prost kind of driver. Mansell because he never give up like the old Lion heart and Prost because he has the race pace of a World Class Champion.
- 426
- Texas
- Exitist_8
I expected the Prost comparison to be based on attitude, not pace
HKS racer
(Banned)
- 4,802
I expected silly comments like this.
- 22,551
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
I wasn't doing it to support Zippy, I was doing it because I just didn't like the myopic scope people are placed in "well it has to be a or b, cause there can't possibly nth degree of answers to why this happened", type thinking. Things aren't black and white but then again as I will say later in this, you too seem to be just as myopic it would seem and perhaps why you actually are defending GTB where I don't defend anyone but my own view.
How is it looking for an excuse? To say that I'd have to first have some bias toward Massa to want to make the excuse for him. I don't, unlike you I'm actually asking the question why did perfromance drop off, when in a car equal to the Mclaren (2007) it could be said that Massa was as good as Fernando but upon return in the 2010 in the same car as Alonso he couldn't replicate the ability he showed in 2007. So why is this? I've posed why I really dont see you brining your claim why, just rather saying "no" emphatically. I guess the closest you've come is saying vaguely is that Alonso is better and it is a simple as that. However, it still doesn't answer then entire equation as to why Felipe fell off the map.
Also you're not that ignorant, it's quite obvious that overall support is at Alonso's disposal. Even when Felipe has drove a better race or started bringing more to the team whether it be in the first half or second, Alonso was give priority. Now whether this started first GP of 2010 or later on that year, I can't say nor am I saying it did. Realistically all I'm saying if Ferrari had big hopes due to him being a WDC driver that was still good, he showed he could deliver and Felipe (couldn't as much) drove alright in 2010 but nothing like years prior.
Simply saying that Fernando showed he could perform and potentially win a WDC and so clearly he'd be given more attention to accomplish this.
How is it flawed, who is to say it can be shown it did or didn't falter, thus it is just a persuasive argument from that point because your logic doesn't prove or disprove nor does mine. And you saying over and over that it does, doesn't work. No I don't automatically think that in such limited parameters I've given you other facets that bring me to this point, and yes I have thought about the surrounding competition that has come and gone post 2009.
Because you can compare the different levels of the car to others and see the strength it has. For example the RBR was fast but had major reliability issues that the Ferrari didn't have. It was also proclaimed as the best car Fernando had driven in his career (can't take this as absolute though), and though not developed through Alonso since he just joined obviously had speed and Felipe did have moments to show this as well but not nearly enough to be a competitive teammate. So why is this? I agree with you that you can't outright say it was the injury (which I haven't) but it should be a variable to why Felipe has fallen or can't muster results like he once could.
Also the next question I ask, is the car now more centered toward what Alonso wants or level between both drivers?
Oh I see, I'm using my heart to make this. Even though I used the same evidence you have and said so, along with other evidence. It's ironic that you claim I'm assuming and yet you've done a gross assumption on my character for arguing. It is more laughable that you think you bring "solid evidence" when you use a majority of the factors many of us have. Also you keep using the term excuses as if people are Felipe apologist, it is quite asinine at this point especially when some of us tell you we're going to be fine without Felipe, especially since I'm a Hamilton fan and have bias against Massa. Also did you ever think that perhaps Ferrari, see the switch in the frame that Massa has a car that can perform (don't tell Ferrari otherwise as Alonso learned); they think that the car should be better than the Lotus and thus Massa should be ahead. Yet they see Kimi at the top with a car and see he still has speed to compete, so obviously he should do better in the superior Ferrari and get them the ever so coveted WCC that Ferrari tend to care more about.
Again, I don't understand how you can blatantly assume that Felipe just fell off the pace (which in this context, would have to be relative to what he was capable of before). Do you have access to Ferrari's telemetry/data acquisition and see a clear decline in his ability to maximize the car or something? Or has Ferrari's so called diminishing support turned him from a WDC contendor into a F1 reject?
I never claimed to, since I'm using the same evidence you have to argue my point. To be snide and ask me that, it's fair of me (though irrational) to ask the same of you. Clearly you must have such evidence that proves Felipe never fell off the map and likewise have evidence of the other teams to show they just got better over that time period.
Well I never pinned it to one thing over another I said it was mulitple factors which brings us full circle as to why this started. My refusal to see it one way or the other, which I've explained to you several times.
Last edited:
The Outlaw
Premium
- 3,042
- Bay Area, California
- GTP_timeattack
FFS, lets start over then. Here's what SagarisGTB originally sated, "Zippy, since Massa was clearly at least a match with Raikkonen for 2.5 years, Alonso beating Massa one sidedly can be explained by either (1) Massa is not as good as he was before or (2) Raikkonen is not as good as many think he is. It has to be at least on or the other. Me, I think it's a little bit of both."
And to remind you of what you responded with since you seem to have forgotten: "Actually it is likely considering that Kimi got the 2007 title and Massa failed to get the 2008, and after the accident in 2009 Ferrari seemed unsure of Massa. Though Alonso they felt could easily revive Ferrari championship winning ability and he almost did in 2010 but failed in the end. Due to this and the obviousness (to ferrari) that Felipe had diminished after being out in 2009 focus from then on shifted toward Alonso. And it could be said that was probably the focus all along due to the 1-2 driver history Ferrari has, even if Felipe was battling for WDCs. So I don't see how it is unlikely."
Do you not see the over reaching assumptions and 2nd bolded text where you state absolute assumption (that Felipe's abilities had legitmately diminished once he returned) as some well known fact? When you start looking closer at your wording, you might see how you interject words here and there that completely change the complexion of your argument.
It's "looking for excuses" because you continually undermine history (results when Kimi/Massa were teamed up) and then come up with this or that reason (based on speculation) as to why Felipe isn't the same driver as before, instead of also being open to the idea that maybe Felipe (in his prime) just could never compete with Alonso to begin with. I'm certainly not saying the latter is the answer...but there's not genuine evidence to say your viewpoint is either.
This is made worse by the fact that in your mind, Felipe "obviously" is not the same driver as before....because pre-2010, "We know Massa was fast in good cars and could compete with other highly fast cars and we know the 2010 car was fast. So why couldn't he muster more than what he did?" or this one, "when in a car equal to the Mclaren (2007) it could be said that Massa was as good as Fernando but upon return in the 2010 in the same car as Alonso he couldn't replicate the ability he showed in 2007."
Your basis for comparison in such instances (and trying to pass such off as fact) is nauseating in such a discussion.
You seem blind to the words you type. If you read my writing above, you quite clearly see the far fetched assumptions you make, which show the answer you're looking to derive at. Since the get go, I've only opened the spectrum of viewpoint, mainly questioning the basis of thinking that Raikkonen is clearly a better choice for Ferrari when it's all based on pure speculation (basically as to why Massa wouldn't be able to compete with Kimi this day in age).
I'm sorry, but I'm done with this topic. No point in trying to argue with another member who tries to play both sides of the fence.
Last edited:
- 22,551
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
It's not overreaching in the context of history, one only has to look at how a near death accident with Niki Lauda ended his career at Ferrari. Though he proved himself a WDC still and almost got Hunt, Ferrari still thought he lost his edge and that is a common attitude Motorsports especially high tier F1, seems to take. Even Kubica can somewhat be looked upon as an example though there are more circumstances to it and the fact he has told the F1 community that he isn't 100%. So it isn't as if I'm saying "this, therefore aliens". Once again it is equally an assumption on your end to think so after I've told you prior and now dug even deeper to tell you more so why I think and say this (though I said it prior in a general sense).
The only reason Massa made it this far is because is due to the coaxing of Alonso saying Massa is easy to work with and doesn't question pulling over for Fernando. Which also gives credence to the idea that Fernando are more likely to do what Alonso wants so long as it helps him have a chance at WDC.
Once again you subvert this entire argument against me an others as if you're the one that only knows how to use historical events in racing and we don't "thus you guys are making assumption e.g. excuses" get over yourself. I've used and said so and it can be seen even in the quote you commented that I'm using results and speed shown (quali or race) to prove that they were on equal terms. I also used the fact that in equal equipment or close to it that Felipe was as good as Alonso.
So you don't like it and thus it isn't a good argument, because you don't like it? Also in that quote I ask you a question that may counter my thinking or help me further see your perspective on the matter, but I see you don't want to answer it and rather make claims at my character and not the topic.
You've passed nothing on that is concrete either and rather than argue directly and disprove it you argue around it and simply say no. You don't provide anything that would sway and then you add your subjective trite to belittle in hopes it will end the debate. I never said any of it was fact or tried to defend it as fact, I'm just giving insight into why I think it may be something to look at. If I said Felipe was fired because of his injury, then I could see the validation for your claims, but I didn't do that. Also you're giving speculation so yet again neither of us are proving anything here.
This coming from the guy who hasn't even given a concise viewpoint but rather say "no that's not right" in a convoluted way and that be it. Also obviously Ferrari have made a speculative decision based on variables that show Kimi is better. I'm simply saying that perhaps Ferrari see a driver that is just as good as 07-08 form, while the other isn't close to it any more.
Now I'm playing both sides of the fence? I thought from your words I had a firm stance on what I believed which was "Felipe was injured and Ferrari never thought he got back to 100%." That is what you've painted me as even though I had more variables to it. Now I'm playing both sides of the fence, once again how?
The Outlaw
Premium
- 3,042
- Bay Area, California
- GTP_timeattack
I'm moving on. It's rather hard to debate with someone when they can't even acknowledge (or simply aren't aware) word for word what they are writing, contradict themselves, and have double standards left and right.
Time to let this cool. The results will speak for themselves when the time comes and that's all that matters 👍
Time to let this cool. The results will speak for themselves when the time comes and that's all that matters 👍
Last edited:
- 2,073
- Newcastle, NSW, Australia
- mrvajj
How important are internet arguments to you people? Sheesh...
- 9,741
- Las Vegas UTC-8
- Wardez
- Wardez
Not exactly relevant, but... Rob Smedley's moved on to Williams 
http://autosprint.corrieredellosport.it/2013/09/12/ferrari-smedley-verso-la-williams/10225/
http://autosprint.corrieredellosport.it/2013/09/12/ferrari-smedley-verso-la-williams/10225/
- 4,487
- YorkshireLand
- SVTlover
Not exactly relevant, but... Rob Smedley's moved on to Williams
http://autosprint.corrieredellosport.it/2013/09/12/ferrari-smedley-verso-la-williams/10225/
Massa to Williams too?
At least he isn't leaving F1, still going to hear his northern british charm.
- 1,406
- New Zealand
Doubt it unless Massa can bring in more money than Maldonado or Bottas.
- 13,909
- Adelaide
- Neomone
How much is Massa going to move them up the constructors standings compared to someone like Maldonado or Bottas? Massa is still a quality driver, and if they can get a middling decent car under him for just one year they might be able to get their money's worth.
Admittedly, it'd be a gamble though.
- 804
- GTP_ZippyCat
- 4,487
- YorkshireLand
- SVTlover
- 3,195
- tribolik
chromatic9
Premium
- 2,835
- England
- chromatic9
Ferrari have signed a lot of people lately, seems quite desperate on the engineer side.
- 13,909
- Adelaide
- Neomone
Well whoever they've got isn't giving them the results they want. I dunno if I'd describe it as desperate, but clearly they're willing to spend what it takes to win.
- 846
- London Town
- SiiverArrow
And where are Lotus getting people to replace them from? Ferrari...
- Status
