Matt Hamilton

That's not right.

Seems premature to break down a trade when you only know half of it.

what evidence is there that Smoak > Carp?

what evidence is there that Smoak > Carp?

I think that's an indictment of Smoak, not praise for Carp

You heard it here first: Carp will become the next David Ortiz.

ZiPS and CAIRO projections for Carp, translated roughly to Fenway Park are 325/420 and 340/440 respectively. That's a reasonably solid contributor.

ZiPS and CAIRO projections for Carp, translated roughly to Fenway Park are 325/420 and 340/440 respectively. That's a reasonably solid contributor.

He did that in Seattle 2 years ago. I'm hoping for more. Also, someone on SoSH pointed out that his minor league splits are the reverse of his ML splits. He's the perfect complement with the bat to Napoli and Gomes. Defense is another story entirely.

Yeah, Carp's MLB splits are a perfect example of how BABIP creates small sample wackiness in platoon splits. Carp has a .372 BABIP vs lefties. Normalize BABIP and you get some pretty regular platoon splits.

what evidence is there that Smoak > Carp?

If they don't care about 1B defense, then Morales should be the 1B; if they do care a lot then Smoak should be there. Neither way is Carp the best option.

Mike "Clumsy" Carp?

Had to look it up. I'm a bit of a comics nerd, but I had no idea what the names of the different BC cavemen were.

As it happens... ZiPS projected OPS+ in Seattle for Carp = Smoak's projection: 98. (Smoak is a better defender/athlete.)

As it happens... ZiPS projected OPS+ in Seattle for Carp = Smoak's projection: 98.

Carp has hit .255/.327/.413 in the majors
Smoak has hit .223/.306/.377 in the majors

Carp has hit .276/.356/.498 in AAA
Smoak has hit .252/.381/.407 in AAA

Smoak's very best performance was 50 games in AA at age 22, where he put up a .930 OPS
Carp in AA at age 22 in 134 games hit .299/.403/.471

so if you ignore the 54 games Smoak played in the PCL (below league average OPS), then you could say that at age 22 Smoak outhit Carp...

So, I'm kind of intrigued as to how ZiPS could see them as equivalent hitters

CAIRO's projections show a gap that looks a lot more reasonable given the data in #13:

241/319/419 - Carp
224/325/370 - Smoak

Smoak > Carp because Zduriencik traded Cliff Lee for Smoak instead of Montero and then traded Michael Pineda later on to get Montero. His only hope of not looking like a complete nitwit for all of this is if Smoak suddenly starts hitting well (Pineda not recovering his pre-surgery form would help too).

#13 I don't know if Dan takes into account that Smoak's a switch-hitter. Basically switch-hitters are a lot less likely to follow a conventional development path.

I'm not saying that's purely a positive for Smoak, just that his projections should be fairly high variance.

Might I propose that if a trade is for a PTBNL/cash then there is no need to "break it down."

Seems premature to break down a trade when you only know half of it.

Ignoring the Davis axiom, I'd say there's a difference between a PTBNL and "a PTBNL or cash." That pretty much guarantees the PTBNL will be meaningless and, if there ever is a PTBNL, might be something like the next guy the Sox drop off the 40-man roster or somebody cut in spring training.

Might I propose that if a trade is for a PTBNL/cash then there is no need to "break it down."

It's Alex Speier. I have to defend him because he is The World's Best Beat Writer.

The article is not breaking down the trade, it's a good discussion of Mike Carp and how he now fits into the Red Sox roster and the spring training competition for bench / platoon roles.

Smoak gets one last chance to show why he was once the #13 prospect. No biggie. Romero (or Catricala) will be up by the AS break any way.
Ibanez was a bad sign any way you look at it.

Smoak gets one last chance to show why he was once the #13 prospect. No biggie. Romero (or Catricala) will be up by the AS break any way.
Ibanez was a bad sign any way you look at it.

I'd say there's a difference between a PTBNL and "a PTBNL or cash." That pretty much guarantees the PTBNL will be meaningless....

Fair enough

FWIW, Pete Abe said some Sox guy told him the PTBNL will be a total non-prospect.

The only Red Sox-Mariners trade that matters is Heathcliff Slocumb for two prospects.

The only Red Sox-Mariners trade that matters is Heathcliff Slocumb for two prospects.

what about jamie moyer for darren bragg?

With this trade, I'd guess the Red Sox bench is now set: Ross, Ciriaco, Sweeney, Carp. Not a bad group overall and one that complements the starters well. Ross more-or-less platooning with Salty will hide Salty's poor RH hitting. Sweeney backs up all three OF spots (with Victorino sliding to center if Ellsbury is down) and does well all of the things Gomes doesn't. Ciriaco could probably start for 5 or 10 teams; here backs up 3B-SS-2B and won't kill you if one of those guys goes down. He can even play the outfield in a pinch and will get plenty of chances to pinch run for guys like Ortiz, Gomes, Napoli, Salty, and Ross.

Carp as the last guy on the bench makes a lot more sense than Nava or Overbay since he can play 1B and LF. He's also young enough to have some upside left, especially going from Safeco to Fenway. It'll also be nice to have someone on the bench with some pop. The Sox haven't had a legitimate power threat to pinch hit with since what, Wily Mo?

what about jamie moyer for darren bragg?

Still bugs me.

what about jamie moyer for darren bragg?

Still bugs me.

Hell, I'd make that trade 100 times out of 100. Moyer was 33 years old and was basically a journeyman pitcher up to that point. Taking a shot that Bragg was legitimately figuring it out with a downside of 4th outfielder was exactly what a team that was completely out of the race should have been doing.

Hell, I'd make that trade 100 times out of 100.

Dissagree. I at the time thought Moyer was a guy who had finally mastered the crafty lefty thing, and he in essence had.
Bragg had one really "good" year, '98, and that's only if you buy into defensive metrics applied to the late 90's. Plus, Bragg was just brutal in his one Sox playoff series in 1998.

Moyer would have been a treat. YMMV...

Bragg didn't work out but if I'm running a team that has the 2nd worst record in the AL at the deadline and I get the opportunity to trade a 33 year old pitcher who can't break a glass and has absolutely nothing on his resume suggesting what he is doing is for real I'm dealing him for whatever I can get. Yeah you lose out on Moyer, and I agree he'd have been fun, but that is going to be the exception not the rule.

a 33 year old pitcher who can't break a glass and has absolutely nothing on his resume suggesting what he is doing is for real

Well, I'm not sure guys on the inside would have seen it that way. Pitching coaches, scouts, that sort thing. I mean, data-wise,
you have a point. But there's more to these kind of decisions than the stat sheet. Lefties can get away with being soft-tossers.
Plus, i have a real fetish for lefty starters.

Bragg didn't work out but if I'm running a team that has the 2nd worst record in the AL at the deadline and I get the opportunity to trade a 33 year old pitcher who can't break a glass and has absolutely nothing on his resume suggesting what he is doing is for real I'm dealing him for whatever I can get. Yeah you lose out on Moyer, and I agree he'd have been fun, but that is going to be the exception not the rule.

Moyer had thrown 416 innings with a 108 ERA+ in 1993-95. He was roughly matching that in '96 with the Red Sox. That's not world-beating, but if they'd actually considered him a full-time starter then that's a valuable player.

As a man who thought Moyer was going to become a good pitcher back in 1987*, I'd like to side with Fernigal ... and will! By the time the Sox dealt him, he had 76 starts of good pitching. Bragg was already 26 and only showing his first signs of successful MLB hitting. I will grant that Moyer looks like about the last pitcher you'd think could succeed in Fenway (1.4 HR/9 was not a fluke). Also the Sox only had him signed for that year while Bragg was still years from FA.

Dissagree. I at the time thought Moyer was a guy who had finally mastered the crafty lefty thing, and he in essence had.
Bragg had one really "good" year, '98, and that's only if you buy into defensive metrics applied to the late 90's. Plus, Bragg was just brutal in his one Sox playoff series in 1998.

Moyer would have been a treat. YMMV...

As Walt points out in #32, Moyer was a free agent at the end of the year whereas Bragg was still under control. They could have had both in '97!

As a man who thought Moyer was going to become a good pitcher back in 1987*, I'd like to side with Fernigal ... and will! By the time the Sox dealt him, he had 76 starts of good pitching. Bragg was already 26 and only showing his first signs of successful MLB hitting. I will grant that Moyer looks like about the last pitcher you'd think could succeed in Fenway (1.4 HR/9 was not a fluke). Also the Sox only had him signed for that year while Bragg was still years from FA.

Seriously?

I remember in '87 thinking of Moyer - geez, this guy is soft-tossing lefty who gives up homers in droves and walks the ballpark.

Of course, I also remember saying to a buddy as we were comparing Maddux and Moyer "Yeah, Maddux is the pointless Dick Ruthven of the future -- Moyer is the LH version"... so clearly, genius tended to escape me in the 80s!

Ben thought he was trading for Mike Trout.

The only Red Sox-Mariners trade that matters is Heathcliff Slocumb for two prospects.

what about jamie moyer for darren bragg?
I've got my own favorite:
Jeff Manto for Arquimedez Pozo. Here are Manto's transactions that summer:
July 23, 1996: Traded by the Boston Red Sox to the Seattle Mariners for Arquimedez Pozo.
August 29, 1996: Selected off waivers by the Boston Red Sox from the Seattle Mariners.

Why didn't Pozo hit more. I know there's a lot of speculation that he was an age fraud, but even so, his AAA numbers suggest that he should've had a better career than he did.

Plus, i have a real fetish for lefty starters.

Do you think the church would approve of this?

#37 Nothing more than Voros' Law in action.

#37 Nothing more than Voros' Law in action.

all of 80 MLB PAs
He hit about as well as Danny Clyburn in AAA (same ages too)
and Clyburn had a similarly inspiring 118 MLB PAs to prove himself.

also a very similar AAA hitter to Ricky Ledee, perhaps a tick below, Ledee got 2000 rather uninspring MLB plate appearances...

I recall thinking that Ledee would have been better than he was.

Not to dissimilar to Bubba Trammell either, who was a decent MLB hitter for few years

Unlike Clyburn, Ledee, and Trammell, though, Pozo was an infielder. His bat should have gone a lot farther as a 3B who could fake it at 2B.

Seriously?

Yes. I'm not claiming that was a rational thought on my part. I just always thought he could pitch. I was disappointed when the Cubs traded him although I couldn't blame them. Sometime around 1992 I started to give up hope but still kept an eye out for him. I was thrilled he had some success in Baltimore and I declared myself a genius sometime around 1996-97.

Of course I thought the same thing about Craig Lefferts in 1983 ... and he was fine but nobody ever gave him a chance to start again until 1992 (when he was league average at the age of 34).

Lefferts in 1983 as a starter:

May 23: 7 IP, 6 H, 1 R, 0 ER
June 5: 7.1 IP, 6 H, 1 R, 1 ER
June 11: 4.1 IP, 6 H, 4 R, 3 ER
June 20: 5 IP, 8 H, 5 R, 5 ER
Aug 16: 5 IP, 3 H, 1 R, 1 ER

That was a 3.14 ERA as a starter, same as his relief ERA which was good for a 121 ERA+. I now notice though that, as a starter, he had a 8/9 K/BB ratio which was, shall we say, not promising. In probably one of the more extreme splits you'll see, he had a 52/20 K/BB ratio as a reliever that year. He was over 2/1 K/BB for his career and well over that when he started again in 92.

Teams decided to keep using him as a reliever and he had nearly 600 relief IP over the next 6 years with a 120 ERA+ which is plenty valuable so they probably got it right.

One might suggest that I am overly influenced by the occasional impressive small sample performance but that would be crazy talk.

As a man who thought Moyer was going to become a good pitcher back in 1987*, I'd like to side with Fernigal ... and will! By the time the Sox dealt him, he had 76 starts of good pitching. Bragg was already 26 and only showing his first signs of successful MLB hitting.

You know, until reading this thread, I had no idea that Moyer had ever pitched for the Sox, none...

I will say this, 1987? Moyer actually had decent velocity when he came up with the Cubs, but he didn't miss bats and he just kind of looked MEH, mediocre command, mediocre FB, mediocre curve... I do recall in one of the BJ Abstracts that James was actually impressed with him- for reasons that had little or nothing to do with Moyer's eventual success (Believe it or not James referred to him as a "hard thrower" who had a good arm).

The Red Sox have added to their pool of potential first basemen/outfielders, acquiring Mike Carp from the Mariners in exchange for a player to be named and/or cash

The Mariners have made their decision: They'll take the cash, which makes me wanna sing the 1-8-7-7-Cash-for-Carp jingle.