User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
|
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
For wholesale prices on baseball gifts and equipment, check these stores out! |
Page rendered in 0.5279 seconds
54 querie(s) executed
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
Actually, no, wait, that's also a great name. I already love this. Please tell me he's a big fatty.
OK, explain to me how it is that giving up Gonzalez was not in the Red Sox's plans and yet they placed him on waivers.
There's no chance that doesn't blow this up, is there? The Red Sox are going to screw this up. Why didn't they get the go-ahead first?
Kind of the end of an era -- one that unraveled in the blink of an eye.
Concur.
Christ on a bicycle.
Obviously it's possible to #### this up, but I don't think you can turn it down. (Unless the Dodgers are actually getting tons of money, to a degree previously unreported.)
Of course, we haven't talked about the money they are supposedly kicking in.
Wait, WHAT???!
I'm in this camp too, which is another reason my first reaction to hate this deal. I can't stand Bobby V. I'm also predicting that the Sox do include a boatload of cash, and that all three guys bounce back and play like stars next year, while we get to watch Bobby and "someone who knows" bad-mouth a new batch of bad-contract replacements.
If some or all of these things don't come to pass I may reconsider my position ...
this could be top 10 weirdest deals in MLB history, no?
That's about right from what I saw the other night against the Giants. He's on a 20 pitch limit right now since he's coming back from TJ, but could be a decent mid-rotation starter.
Well, A-Gone is gonna be fine. His deal was a steal and a bad half a season - followed by a monster 2nd half - should not get him traded. But man, punting the whole team (basically) is pretty ballsy of the FO. That text-message must have PISSED some folks off....
Is Colletti still the GM in LA? Cuz dropping $200 M in payroll and getting to trade with Colletti just might be too good to pass up.
Awesome. Was there any doubt they'd find a way to screw it up?
Amazing.
I wouldn't consider Gonzalez' contract an albatross given the going rate for star first basemen is these days.
Yes, he's still the guy. You just KNOW Colletti is trying to find a way to get Lackey too. For Matt Kemp.
Maybe, but really, why would either guy block a trade to get them out of Boston at this point?
I hope the narrative goes down this way. Trading a guy for a disparaging text is neo-steinbrenian
...
Obviously it's a bad deal that we all hate if the Sox are paying the freight. But if they aren't, can you really make a good case against this as in pure baseball terms?
Maybe I don't understand the term 'baseball' but what on Earth are you talking about? I'm wracking my brain trying to figure out where I've gone wrong because I normally agree with you, but, can you name ONE baseball reason in favor of this trade?
2013: Crawford > No Crawford
2012: Beckett > Another 5th starter option
2013: Beckett ~ FA SPs
2012: Gonzalez >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Loney
2013: Gonzalez >>>>>>>>>>>> Nobody
De La Rosa is a lottery ticket. The rest of what's coming back from LA is junk. You agree that the evaluation of the trade hinges on how much $$ Boston sends to LA. So how can you possibly say this could be a win for the Sox in baseball terms?
Beckett and Crawford are horribly overpaid. The Sox will indeed have to do some work to find players to spend this money on, but I think it's a much, much better position to be in than having to pay Crawford and Beckett lots of money on into the future.
Good Sox 1967-2008 RIP
Let's get ethier in there one more time for good measure.
I assume that second Ethier was supposed to be the second (or first) Ellis.
Speaking of vast improvements of the Dodgers lineup who saw AJ Ellis as one of the better hitting catchers in baseball?
A Kemp-Ethier-Kemp-Ethier-Kemp-Ethier-Kemp-Ethier-Kemp lineup would have looked really good to go with the Kershaw-Kershaw-Kershaw-Kershaw-Blanton rotation.
Meaningless. In a good system he'd be nobody. Webster was ranked #95 by BA pre-2012 and from the look of the component stats has failed to make any progress whatsoever in his second look at AA at age 22.
Unless De Jesus has outlandishly good defense (at two of the three positions left on the diamond that the Sox DON'T need somebody), he's garbage too.
We already know Loney and Sands are useless.
The Sox will indeed have to do some work to find players to spend this money on
Putting it lightly. If they back up the truck for Swisher or Choo or whoever, effectively repeating the exact same mistake they made with Crawford in the first place, my interest in this team is really going to suffer.
And I still disagree with you. 'Overpaid' is not a 'baseball reason'. After this trade, the team on the field is going to be much, much worse (CERTAINLY for 2012 and the subsequently foreseeable future) than it was before. Much worse.
EDIT:
Speaking of vast improvements of the Dodgers lineup who saw AJ Ellis as one of the better hitting catchers in baseball?
I don't even know anything about him, but his series of interviews with Kershaw called 'Between Two Palm Trees' is utterly hilarious, and I hate the Dodgers.
EDIT2:
Per Dock's reportage below, there is basically no agreement in place, is there? If they haven't worked out how much money is moving, this is far from done.
We won't know what the break-even percentage is until we know how much dough they're including.
More fundamentally, since the terrible contracts were the work of essentially the same management team (minus Theo, to be sure, but I'm assuming Cherington and ownership had a part of the Crawford signing and the Beckett extension), why should we have any confidence that they will spend the saved money at 75% efficiency rather than overpay for worse players?
i'm sticking with my nutbag prediction: dodgers in the WS!!!!
I actually want this to happen just to see what happens in the aftermath. This is mindboggling.
It'd be hard to spend the money worse.
How much the Dodgers get back is going to be the real key to the deal, and will be the reason it falls apart if anything.
Loney can stand there for a month. Then maybe Lavarnway. Or convert Nava. Or a guy. It's first base.
The players are agreed on, but the latest info says the money is being worked out, and Beckett and Crawford still have to agree. That's how "done" it is so far.
I'm sharing what I think is relevant and new information. That's my understand of what has happened so far. I still think actually taking down the Gonzalez poster at Fenway is certainly indicative of SOMETHING.
To contend in 2013-2014, prior to the trade, the Red Sox needed to spend their money very wisely. You presumably think they wouldn't, so the 2013-2014 Red Sox were ###### anyway. Now they only need to spend their money reasonably competently. I prefer this situation.
He has 10-5 rights, they still apply in waivers. But I doubt he'd say no. If they can't work out the money, just let them have Beckett.
Cherington has not covered himself in glory so far.
Also known as "the karlmagnus / Benji special".
"Oh great, we traded Scott Atchison for Mike Trout. Forgive me for not getting excited about another Cherington move. The first time he tweaks a hamstring the Red Sox trainers will make sure it turns into an amputation. And when we're ready to win again, he's going to be another ballooning contract albatross anyway."
The hidden benefit here is the following:
We know Cherington couldn't do well and find good solutions on a tight budget, but he could point to being saddled with bad contracts. That excuse will now be gone. If the Sox stink in 2013, he's probably gone, with mid-2014 as the outside end if they still aren't playing well. So either we'll expedite his firing (because he stinks) or he'll spend the money more wisely and we'll be in better shape. Win-win!
The Youk deal made clear that they are more than willing to trade good players for pennies on the dollar for financial/clubhouse reasons. Team chemistry is going to have to get pretty ####### amazing to make up for losing three players as good as Gonzalez/Beckett/Crawford - unless the money is used to sign players as good or better.
Why didn't they make the Dodgers take ############# Lackey, too?
But there's not really anyone to spend it on for 2013 - at least not at the position they're vacating. The one thing that might make sense would be to overpay Swisher to play first base but on a one year deal. Given him 1 year at $13-14 million. Get a decent player, but don't lock yourself into anything.
Can just see it...Beane: "Boss, I made the best trade yet, got a bunch of prospects from the Red Sox and I didn't give up any players, just sent him our GM".
Yeah, that 2.8 WAR is gonna be really hard to replace.
eta: That's being churlish, but so is imagining that any of them other than Gonzalez are at all likely to be worth their contracts.
Perhaps unrealistically, I was hoping that bounce-backs by Gonzalez, Crawford and Beckett would give the 2013 and 2014 teams at least an outiside shot at contention, although I wasn't all that optimistic.
IIRC, this is not a particularly strong FA year. My concern is that the Sox will either give in to fan/media pressure and overpay for replacements who aren't as good as the guys they're giving up (even if they're overpaid by smaller amounts), or will pocket the savings and go into a full rebuild mode. The latter option might be for the best in the long run, but I'm not looking forward to the short run very much.
I think it is going to be a very long time until we see another strong FA year.
Here are the 2013 FAs at 1B per Cots. Who would you like to pay? As noted somewhere above, LaRoche has a mutual option for 2013 for $10m with a $1m buyout.
First Basemen
Travis Hafner *
Aubrey Huff *
Adam LaRoche *
Carlos Lee
James Loney
Ty Wigginton *
EDIT
imagining that any of them other than Gonzalez are at all likely to be worth their contracts.
Who cares? I want the Red Sox to have good baseball players, not good values. Payroll is limited but so are the options available. Unless you want to make the case that paying these three was going to hamstring the team to the extent that they couldn't add good baseball players to the roster - does this deal involve sending good baseball players to another team or doesn't it?
EDIT2:
Nobody's going to take my Valentine bet after this ########### of a trade, so why don't you put your money where your mouth is, scott? I'll bet a $20 bbref sponsorship that those three players accrue more 2013 WAR than their replacements in Boston.
I'd take Hamilton + Grienke over a one armed Crawford and Beckett.
That or trade for Soriano (kidding).
The prospects could be something or nothing at this point, and with the money changing hands still uncertain, it's too soon to evaluate this deal. The Red Sox are left with some holes in a somewhat underwhelming free agent market. The deal does pretty much guarantee that Boston will reap the financial benefits of getting below the luxury tax threshold, and the owners could still put the money in their own pockets. It will be interesting to see how new financial flexibility is used, but it could take a couple of seasons, or more, to rebuild.
Choo is already basically being announced to be shopped. It'd be surprising if Upton isn't at least shopped. I'm sure there will be more, but sometimes those are difficult to see this time of year. If it's FA or bust, 2013 will be rough, but it likely won't be FA or bust.
His hitting this year wasn't terrible for a guy with a bum elbow who just had TJ surgery. I think he could be good again -- massively overpaid, but good.
David Ortiz.
Be interesting to see how the Giants Brass deals with the 2013-14 versions of Jose Reyes and Carlos Beltran -- two guys they needed but could "not afford".
This is actually a great idea. Still need another hitter, though. Unless it's Lavarnway. Hm. Still worse than Gonzalez. And much riskier.
I wouldn't be shocked if they do.
Okay... it would be churlish for me to tell you to #### off, then, but if you agree that these three are likely to be better on the baseball diamond than whoever Cherington replaces them with, I don't understand what your argument was in the first place.
Huh? He's 19 and has played 13 games at AA. The prospect road is littered with the carcasses of guys who looked equally good at this stage and flamed out. I like Bogaerts, too, but let's not get carried away.
Because there's 6 other starting spots on the diamond. And 19 other spots on the roster. I think it's entirely possible that those three players out produce whatever three players take their individual roles, but that doesn't mean jack all considering that you can also improve elsewhere given the additional payroll flexibility.
Also, you seem to be under the impression that Crawford is good.
Theoretically true. In context, less so. Though I'd love to see it.
Also, you seem to be under the impression that Crawford is good.
We don't have to have this out here - this topic has been done to death repeatedly. I'll settle for saying that there is plenty of evidence that he might well be.
And, again, you think he's so awful and the Sox have so much money to distribute intelligently - it shouldn't be hard to replace a worthless ballplayer - my offer remains on the table. Unless you have something constructive to say, I'll leave it at that.
Also, if this thing does happen, I am willing to gamble that A-Gon gets MVP votes next year.
Do the Red Sox really pull back Beckett because the Dodgers want the Red Sox to give them 20 million dollars instead of 10 million?
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main