Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Saturday, August 25, 2012

Silverman: Blockbuster Complete

There are times when only the words of Inspector Gadget can capture the situation.  Wowzers.

Early this morning, the Red Sox and Dodgers concluded a blockbuster deal in which the Red Sox shipped four players – Adrian Gonzalez, Josh Beckett, Carl Crawford and Nick Punto – in exchange for a massive relief in salary as well as four minor-leaguers and first baseman James Loney, according to a Red Sox source.

The deal will be worth in excess of $275 million to the Red Sox including luxury tax savings and salaries for the remainder of this season and beyond. Over the next six years, the Dodgers will receive $12 million from the Red Sox, with the payments to begin next year.

Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: August 25, 2012 at 09:37 AM | 197 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: dodgers, red sox, trades, transactions

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.

Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 > 
   1. Banta Posted: August 25, 2012 at 09:49 AM (#4217712)
It really is like trades I've made on Baseball Mogul before and laughed to myself, "that would never really happen."

Am I crazy that I think this trade actually is pretty even for both teams?
   2. Rafael Bellylard: A failure of the waist. Posted: August 25, 2012 at 09:55 AM (#4217719)
I don't think we can evaluate the trade until we see what the Sox do with the money they just saved. If John Henry sticks it in his pocket and Boston decides to set a budget of $80M or so, then the Dodgers win the trade on the field.
   3. TerpNats Posted: August 25, 2012 at 09:58 AM (#4217722)
This doesn't guarantee the Dodgers a playoff berth by any means, but it certainly puts them in fine shape for 2013 and beyond. Gonzalez in particular should thrive on escaping the Bosox soap opera and returning to SoCal.
   4. Bob Tufts Posted: August 25, 2012 at 09:59 AM (#4217724)
Your average Red Sox fan this monring:

"You maniacs! You blew it up! Ah, damn you! God damn you all to hell! "


   5. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: August 25, 2012 at 10:01 AM (#4217727)
if you consider this from a purely corporate running a company perspective you had employees who had ties to previous leadership, you gave them some time and decided that to get things moving in the right direction you needed to 'fire' them. now in most corporate settings this would have happened a lot sooner but baseball has its own nuances so you can understand the lag. but eventually cleaning house was required.

gives new leadership two things, just to put their own folks in place and also tell the remaining employees either get on board or leadership will find a new home for those employees not buying into the program.

that and this would appear to solidify your manager's position.

better work though. 'shareholders' aka fans have limited patience.
   6. Jon T. Posted: August 25, 2012 at 10:06 AM (#4217732)
are the Sox sending $12 million per year for 6 years to the Dodgers, or $12 million total?
   7. Lassus Posted: August 25, 2012 at 10:06 AM (#4217735)
The only thing this was missing was Ray declaring it impossible and stupid to even discuss.

But, we had a lot of that from elsewhere, so still pretty fun.
   8. Justin T., Director of Somethin Posted: August 25, 2012 at 10:08 AM (#4217737)
It didn't seem to add up at the time because nobody saw this on the horizon, but I guess now we know who leaked that Gonzalez texted ownership to whine about the manager. It was who it always is there - management itself.
   9. Swedish Chef Posted: August 25, 2012 at 10:14 AM (#4217746)
The only thing this was missing was Ray declaring it impossible and stupid to even discuss.

Wasn't the entire second page of the waiver claim thread full of Ray claiming that?
   10. DA Baracus is a "bloodthirsty fan of Atlanta." Posted: August 25, 2012 at 10:15 AM (#4217747)
It didn't seem to add up at the time because nobody saw this on the horizon, but I guess now we know who leaked that Gonzalez texted ownership to whine about the manager.


Kelly Shoppach, duh.
   11. Rafael Bellylard: A failure of the waist. Posted: August 25, 2012 at 10:16 AM (#4217748)
Wasn't the entire second page of the waiver claim thread full of Ray claiming that?


Yes, and they all seem to have disappeared.

EDIT: My mistake. Found them starting at #246
   12. Joey B. is being stalked by a (Gonfa) loon Posted: August 25, 2012 at 10:21 AM (#4217751)
Slap me with a drumstick and call me the Colonel, I haven't seen a purge like this Fidel took over. They're really moving out all of the malcontents and chicken-eating fatboys. Is Pedroia going to be next?
   13. Rafael Bellylard: A failure of the waist. Posted: August 25, 2012 at 10:25 AM (#4217753)
Is Pedroia going to be next?


Good, it's not just me thinking this.
   14. Mayor Blomberg Posted: August 25, 2012 at 10:27 AM (#4217756)
9,11 - The "idiot fanboy proposal" reaction to the first report looks humorous in retrospect.

Hell of a trade.
   15. JE (Jason Epstein) Posted: August 25, 2012 at 10:27 AM (#4217757)
The obvious downside to this mega-deal is it will further embolden the legions of WFAN callers bellowing for the Yankees to acquire King Felix for Brett Gardner, Jayson Nix, Chris Stewart, and Manny Banuelos.
   16. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: August 25, 2012 at 10:28 AM (#4217758)
are the Sox sending $12 million per year for 6 years to the Dodgers, or $12 million total?
Silverman says (in the excerpt) it's $12M total over six years.
   17. Scott Ross Posted: August 25, 2012 at 10:30 AM (#4217760)
Who says you can't fire the team?
   18. Jon T. Posted: August 25, 2012 at 10:31 AM (#4217762)
awesome. thanks MCOA
   19. jack the seal clubber (on the sidelines of life) Posted: August 25, 2012 at 10:38 AM (#4217770)
Tom Werner just described James Loney as "untouchable" a couple years ago. Does anyone here remember any time in which James Loney, who makes Adrian Gonzalez look like Jimmie Foxx, was in that category?
   20. Jay Seaver Posted: August 25, 2012 at 10:43 AM (#4217775)
Well, crap. I know this season's going nowhere, and that there seems to be a method to this madness, but I was really looking forward to finally seeing Crawford could do and Adrian Gonzalez and and and...

The hot stove season has started early and it's going to be insane.
   21. TVerik, the gum-snappin' hairdresser Posted: August 25, 2012 at 10:44 AM (#4217779)
I am still of the mind that until I see these players (save Crawford, of course) actually change uniforms, it isn't done. But let's look ahead as if this were done:

a) less than a week after TJS, would Crawford show up at the press conference?
b) this would mean that Valentine is likely safe, at least into 2013, right?
c) I don't understand the groupthink developing that Ortiz is absolutely coming back. If the Sox are "punting" 2013 in exchange for payroll flexibility here, what could a zillion-year-old DH provide for them?
d) the hot stove could be essentially over in August. Has that ever happened before?
   22. MHS Posted: August 25, 2012 at 10:49 AM (#4217785)
When asked last night if he was planning on returning, Ortiz replied: of course why not.
   23. jack the seal clubber (on the sidelines of life) Posted: August 25, 2012 at 10:50 AM (#4217787)
this would mean that Valentine is likely safe, at least into 2013, right?


yes to that, but given the housecleaning, the likelihood is he gets the boot after October.
   24. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: August 25, 2012 at 10:52 AM (#4217788)
c) I don't understand the groupthink developing that Ortiz is absolutely coming back. If the Sox are "punting" 2013 in exchange for payroll flexibility here, what could a zillion-year-old DH provide for them?


Something positive for the fans to root for. It's all about PR even if the Sox don't put together a contending team (which should be the goal). 2/32 or something like that for Ortiz won't hamstring the Sox after these deals and while the majority if fans I think are pleased about this okay people are going to want some recognizable names next year.
   25. cardsfanboy Posted: August 25, 2012 at 10:53 AM (#4217789)
Don't know all the players involved, but the winner is Carl Crawford. He had to get out of that stadium, if there is one stadium in baseball designed to counter all his value/skills, it's Fenway. He's going to go out and post 115+ ops+ and people are going to say getting away from the pressure of Boston is why, when we know the reality is getting away from Fenway is why(of course that is if he ever becomes healthy to play everyday)
   26. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: August 25, 2012 at 10:53 AM (#4217791)
c) I don't understand the groupthink developing that Ortiz is absolutely coming back. If the Sox are "punting" 2013 in exchange for payroll flexibility here, what could a zillion-year-old DH provide for them?
The conclusion follows from the premise, but I don't accept the premise. 2013 should be a bridge year, where the Red Sox balance present and future goals with more of a tilt to the future, but they should not "punt" on a $170M budget with the core talent they still have. The Sox should be aiming at a 90-win roster for next year and Wild Card contention.
d) the hot stove could be essentially over in August. Has that ever happened before?
The Red Sox, for one, are not close to done with their hot stove. Now they have to build a roster for 2013 (and beyond) using their new cash reserves and perhaps some of the new young talent they've acquired. I think a trade for Justin Upton is not unlikely.
   27. Good cripple hitter Posted: August 25, 2012 at 10:54 AM (#4217793)
9,11 - The "idiot fanboy proposal" reaction to the first report looks humorous in retrospect.


I was wrong, so wrong, so very very wrong. I'm still shocked that this trade was completed so easily.


Tom Werner just described James Loney as "untouchable" a couple years ago. Does anyone here remember any time in which James Loney, who makes Adrian Gonzalez look like Jimmie Foxx, was in that category?


I don't know if untouchable's the word, but he was highly regarded in Los Angeles. There's a report from two years ago that the Dodgers refused to include Loney in any trade for Cliff Lee back when he was a Mariner. In 2010 the Dodgers reportedly shot down a Loney/Broxton for Prince Fielder deal at the winter meetings.
   28. booond Posted: August 25, 2012 at 10:54 AM (#4217794)
the hot stove could be essentially over in August. Has that ever happened before?


It's just begun.
   29. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: August 25, 2012 at 10:56 AM (#4217797)
d) the hot stove could be essentially over in August. Has that ever happened before?


Are you kidding? The hot stove season is going to be insane. A big market team on the heels of a massively disappointing season has $100 million to spend, a strong farm system to make some trades and a host of holes to fill. Agents everywhere are rubbing their hands together gleefully. Rumors this off season are going to be beyond ridiculous.
   30. booond Posted: August 25, 2012 at 10:56 AM (#4217799)
James Loney is roster fodder. Put him back on the mound and see if he can become a reasonable reliever.
   31. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: August 25, 2012 at 11:01 AM (#4217802)
Loney was once a pretty big time prospect. From B-Ref:

Pre-2003: Rated #34 Prospect
Pre-2004: Rated #42 Prospect
Pre-2005: Rated #62 Prospect
Pre-2007: Rated #44 Prospect

He broke out in 2006 with a 950 OPS in his first taste of AAA competition. He hit .320 with unexpected power in the majors from 2006-2007. In retrospect, that looks not insignificantly like a BABIP / PCL fluke, but the Dodgers have been expecting him to be a batting title contender for years on the basis of his numbers at ages 22-23.
   32. Joey B. is being stalked by a (Gonfa) loon Posted: August 25, 2012 at 11:02 AM (#4217803)
yes to that, but given the housecleaning, the likelihood is he gets the boot after October.

I don't think so. I think all of these actions pretty clearly prove that high level management has decided that the malcontents are the real problem, not Valentine. I think he gets one more chance next year.
   33. TVerik, the gum-snappin' hairdresser Posted: August 25, 2012 at 11:02 AM (#4217804)
e) Gomez and the neck guy are going to get an extended tryout
   34. Shock Posted: August 25, 2012 at 11:03 AM (#4217805)
Um um um Wow.

My favorite part of this is the random inclusion of Nicky Punto. That is exactly like a video game trade.
   35. TVerik, the gum-snappin' hairdresser Posted: August 25, 2012 at 11:03 AM (#4217806)
I do think that if I'm Pedroia and I'm presented with the option, I lease but don't buy in Boston at this time.
   36. TVerik, the gum-snappin' hairdresser Posted: August 25, 2012 at 11:05 AM (#4217808)
And if I'm Punto, I start calling myself "The Lynchpin" and have a bunch of T-shirts with that name printed up.
   37. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: August 25, 2012 at 11:05 AM (#4217811)
Ciriaco has been playing regularly for awhile now so that's not going to change. I'd be surprised if Gomez got much more PT though, I don't think the Sox think they have anything there. The first baseman next year isn't with the organization today ( and that includes Loney).
   38. cardsfanboy Posted: August 25, 2012 at 11:07 AM (#4217812)
I don't think so. I think all of these actions pretty clearly prove that high level management has decided that the malcontents are the real problem, not Valentine. I think he gets one more chance next year.


Agreed. (never thought I would say that)
   39. TVerik, the gum-snappin' hairdresser Posted: August 25, 2012 at 11:10 AM (#4217813)
At my job, the HR people weekly have some sort of soothing address that says "If you don't like how things are going, come talk to us!"

They work for the company, not for me. If there's some sort of conflict between me and the company, they'll side with the company and find a way to get me out of there.

So don't be honest; don't let them know that there is a problem, unless you're ready to pack your bags. And if you are, just quit and negotiate your own landing place.

These comparisons with baseball are tricky; me and most of my fellow posters are "at-will" employees, while these baseballers are contract employees. But if Gonzo really liked it in Boston but was expressing his honest disappointment and assessment of what was wrong and then was told "Pack up and go West while we take care of things here", it could (and probably should) have a chilling effect for other players communicating openly with ownership.
   40. The George Sherrill Selection Posted: August 25, 2012 at 11:12 AM (#4217814)
Slap me with a drumstick and call me the Colonel, I haven't seen a purge like this Fidel took over.


I was thinking the Saturday Night Live "cast fire."
   41. 'zop sympathizes with the wrong ####### people Posted: August 25, 2012 at 11:15 AM (#4217817)
I think this is a terrible, terrible trade for Boston. It's yet another of the "too cute by half" moves they always seem to be making. The issue, IMO, is that they simply can't accumulate enough WAR in one off-season to be competitive in the AL East next year, barring usual flukiness. (90 wins, as MCoA posits? From where?)

Because the market for players isn't particularly liquid, the $260M or whatever that comes off the books can't just be immediately sowed back into the team. A lot of that money, by necessity, has to lay fallow for a season or more until opportunities come to spend it efficiently. If you put it to use immediately, you can get more players but the WAR/$ ratio won't be any better than in the previous incarnation of the roster, the one you just blew up.

The point of the game isn't to maximize WAR/$, its to maxmize WAR. Those two goals are very similar, normally overlap, but not always. This is a time where they don't overlap.

I also think prospects are perpetually overrated. Bird-in-#######-hand over the guy in AA with a nice K-rate.

The point of all this is that even if you think that Beckett or Crawford aren't worth their ongoing contracts, it's still not necessarily a good move to trade everyone at once.
   42. Danny Posted: August 25, 2012 at 11:16 AM (#4217818)
What contracts do people think Gonzalez, Beckett, and Crawford would get if they were free agents this winter? Seems like a huge overpay for the Dodgers, almost entirely because of Crawford.
   43. Best Dressed Chicken in Town Posted: August 25, 2012 at 11:25 AM (#4217823)
Where's that moron ray-ray? Getting a long overdue software upgrade? He says more dumb things in one day on this site than most do in their entire lives. It's truly spectacular to behold at times.
   44. Swedish Chef Posted: August 25, 2012 at 11:27 AM (#4217825)
What contracts do people think Gonzalez, Beckett, and Crawford would get if they were free agents this winter? Seems like a huge overpay for the Dodgers, almost entirely because of Crawford.

In the other thread I assumed that Beckett and Gonzalez could get their current deals and that Crawford could get 3/45 as a strong bounceback candidate.
   45. toratoratora Posted: August 25, 2012 at 11:30 AM (#4217826)
Holy Snikes, what a ballsy move.
Say what you will, this one takes cojones.
And what a message it sends.It lets all of baseball know that the dog wags the tail, not vice versa.

I go up and down on it. I'm delighted to be rid of Crawford and Beckett, but losing Agon was a steep price. And I have little faith in the FO ability to go out and fill the many gaps.
I'm scared and happy and nervous and giddy and my head,I think it gonna explode.
   46. Lassus Posted: August 25, 2012 at 11:30 AM (#4217827)
Wasn't the entire second page of the waiver claim thread full of Ray claiming that?

No ####### way!

Totally missed that, shouldn't have assumed.
   47. Non-Youkilidian Geometry Posted: August 25, 2012 at 11:34 AM (#4217828)
If the Sox are really only paying $12 million total, I guess I have to change my position and get on the bandwagon, however grudgingly. I was expecting many multiples higher -- maybe something in the $70-90 million range. If its only $12 million, the long-term benefits of ditching the declining years for these guys makes it pretty hard to pass it up.

That said, I'm a lot less optimistic than MCoA about the short-term implications. There isn't a lot of talent available on the free agent market, and with so many teams awash in TV revenue I expect there are going to be a lot of overpays and very few bargain signings. 2004 was great and all that, but the likelihood of going out and getting another Ortiz from the scrapheap or another Bill Mueller is not high -- these kinds of moves simply don't pan out all that often even when you have the most skilled front office talent evaluators. On top of that, judging from their recent record, I don't see much reason for confidence that the current management team has any particular skill at identifying undervalued players. Their real skill seems to be in overvaluing and overpaying guys.

Trading for Upton is an intriguing idea, but he's coming off a very disappointing season and it is far from a sure thing that he'll bounce back, particularly in the Boston environment. The fact that the D-Backs management appears to be intent on running him out of town raises some red flags -- while whatever problems Upton is having with the D-Backs may well not be his fault, it doesn't bode particularly well for his ability to handle the situation in Boston. In any case, there are likely to be a lot of suitors for him given his clear upside, and to get him the Sox may have to pay a very steep price in prospects,

There are also several other reasons why the non-rational part of my brain hates this trade: (i) we are sure to now see yet another of the Sox patented anonymous-yet-almost-certainly-officially-sanctioned smear campaigns against the departing players. The inability to take the high road and STFU is my least favourite thing about the current ownership/management group; (ii) I think this means at least another year of Bobby V., who I predict will be given a further chance to see what he can do with a new squad of "his" guys; (iii) the talk radio guys and the CHB et al. are going to be even more insufferable than usual this winter, and next year if the team is bad (which seems to me the most likely scenario).

So while this trade may be for the best in the long term, I'm still not looking forward to the short term very much.
   48. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: August 25, 2012 at 11:39 AM (#4217832)
That said, I'm a lot less optimistic than MCoA about the short-term implications.
The important thing here is the baseline. The Sox, before the trade, had about $15M to spend and a 85-88 win roster, maybe. That's not a club in contention for anything other than the wild card, and they weren't in great position for the middle-term. The job for 2013 is tough, and I don't mean to undersell how difficult it is to bring in the talent the Sox need, but the baseline job was going to be even tougher, I think.
   49. 'Spos lost the handle trying to make the transfer Posted: August 25, 2012 at 11:39 AM (#4217833)
The hot stove season has started early and it's going to be insane.


Did the 2011 hot stove season ever really end?
   50. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: August 25, 2012 at 11:40 AM (#4217835)
They work for the company, not for me. If there's some sort of conflict between me and the company, they'll side with the company and find a way to get me out of there.


What's funny is that (at my company at least) the most junior employes always run straight to HR at the first hint of conflict. It's like they think that there's a rule against talking to your supervisor.

What contracts do people think Gonzalez, Beckett, and Crawford would get if they were free agents this winter? Seems like a huge overpay for the Dodgers, almost entirely because of Crawford.


Well, the Dodgers seem to be OK with giving Gonzalez what the Red Sox gave him. Maybe they're a little too quick to conclude that he's still a very good hitter who just had a bad first half; time will tell. I'd guess that they probably think that Beckett is going to be overpaid for a back-of-the-rotation-innings-eater, but what the hell it's only for two years. And Apparently they're assuming that Crawford has sucked because of his injuries and will come back to be worth a 5yr/$90M contract.
   51. Drew (Primakov, Gungho Iguanas) Posted: August 25, 2012 at 11:43 AM (#4217840)
From a .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on the deal:

How about a trade that's equally toxic for both parties?


the Red Sox, with their two World Series titles last decade (and that seems a long time ago, yeah?), are playing in a market big on expectations and short on patience.


, it does create one problem.

There is no middle of the order.


I find this kind of short-sightedness obnoxious. It's bleedingly obvious that Boston now has a huge amount of cash dying to be spent right. Whether they'll spend it right is anybody's guess. But they're definitely not going to just sit on the cash. So Boston fans won't need to be that patient.
   52. Drew (Primakov, Gungho Iguanas) Posted: August 25, 2012 at 11:45 AM (#4217841)
And whether Crawford and Beckett will thrive elsewhere is irrelevant. They weren't thriving in Boston, and with the clubhouse situation, it doesn't seem likely that they WOULD have thrived here.
   53. DA Baracus is a "bloodthirsty fan of Atlanta." Posted: August 25, 2012 at 11:47 AM (#4217844)
   54. Drew (Primakov, Gungho Iguanas) Posted: August 25, 2012 at 11:50 AM (#4217848)
@53: Most of the league goes on trade waivers in August, to gauge interest. Most of those guys get pulled back.
   55. TVerik, the gum-snappin' hairdresser Posted: August 25, 2012 at 11:55 AM (#4217854)
It's frustrating, though understandable. The top three threads in Hot Topics are varieties of this trade-which-is-not-yet. IMHO, Jim (and others) need to find a way to "group" topics so that people who simply don't care about this particular story can still navigate the site and find other discussions.
   56. TVerik, the gum-snappin' hairdresser Posted: August 25, 2012 at 11:58 AM (#4217857)
...And those who are interested in this topic have one place to get updates and see the opinions of their friends.
   57. booond Posted: August 25, 2012 at 11:59 AM (#4217859)
The job for 2013 is tough, and I don't mean to undersell how difficult it is to bring in the talent the Sox need, but the baseline job was going to be even tougher, I think.


Correct. This is a move for 2014 and beyond. Xander needs to oil his first base mitt.
   58. TVerik, the gum-snappin' hairdresser Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:02 PM (#4217862)
In 2012, I think this trade helps the Rays more than the Yankees or Orioles. The Gonzalez-less (and Beckett-less, though I think that matters less) Sox play them six times in the last month.
   59. Tom Nawrocki Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:02 PM (#4217863)
I'll bet back in April you could have gotten 1000 to 1 odds that the Red Sox would trade all of Adrian Gonzalez, Carl Crawford and Kevin Youkilis before the end of the season.
   60. DA Baracus is a "bloodthirsty fan of Atlanta." Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:05 PM (#4217869)
@53: Most of the league goes on trade waivers in August, to gauge interest. Most of those guys get pulled back.


I'm aware of that. But right after this trade? I'm not chalking it up to coincidence.
   61. Drew (Primakov, Gungho Iguanas) Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:06 PM (#4217870)
The top three threads in Hot Topics are varieties of this trade-which-is-not-yet. IMHO, Jim (and others) need to find a way to "group" topics so that people who simply don't care about this particular story can still navigate the site and find other discussions.


The easiest way would be to briefly scan the article submissions for like content, and not approve all of the similar ones.

Or stick the Red Sox submissions in Sox Therapy.
   62. Drew (Primakov, Gungho Iguanas) Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:10 PM (#4217876)
I'm aware of that. But right after this trade? I'm not chalking it up to coincidence.


Perhaps not. Anything is possible now. Jackie Bradley might push Ellsbury, but even the most optimistic forecast won't have Bradley as a 30-30 guy. And trading Lester during his worst year would be dumb.

I'm fine with what happened today--I won't be if they trade Ells and Lester. They've got plenty of money to use now.
   63. TVerik, the gum-snappin' hairdresser Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:11 PM (#4217878)
If this is a good thing for the Sox longterm, they owe Bobby V a strange, indirect debt. If this team were knocking on the periphery (or leading) the Wild Card pursuit, it would be a LOT harder to get such a "white flag" trade past the fanbase.

Do you think Crawford regrets opting for TJS in August? The Dodgers - his Dodgers - might well make a playoff run and could use even an enfeebled left fielder.
   64. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:12 PM (#4217880)
It's frustrating, though understandable. The top three threads in Hot Topics are varieties of this trade-which-is-not-yet. IMHO, Jim (and others) need to find a way to "group" topics so that people who simply don't care about this particular story can still navigate the site and find other discussions.

Pretty hard to be a baseball fan and not care about such a huge, unprecedented deal.
   65. DKDC Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:14 PM (#4217882)
In 2012, I think this trade helps the Rays more than the Yankees or Orioles. The Gonzalez-less (and Beckett-less, though I think that matters less) Sox play them six times in the last month.


I'm not getting this. The Red Sox play the Orioles an Yankees 6 more times too. Their last 24 games are six apiece against the rest of the division.
   66. TVerik, the gum-snappin' hairdresser Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:16 PM (#4217890)
Pretty hard to be a baseball fan and not care about such a huge, unprecedented deal.


If it was between the Royals and Pirates, it would still draw energetic discussion and interest. But I don't believe that four of the top five stories in Hot Topics would be devoted to it.
   67. Dan Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:16 PM (#4217892)
Do you think Crawford regrets opting for TJS in August? The Dodgers - his Dodgers - might well make a playoff run and could use even an enfeebled left fielder.


They have Victorino for the rest of the season to play LF. I'm sure they'd rather have Crawford healthy for next year to replace him than force Victorino to the bench or into a platoon in LF with Crawford.
   68. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:17 PM (#4217893)
I'm not getting this.


Forget it, he's rolling.

EDITED to add context.
   69. TVerik, the gum-snappin' hairdresser Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:17 PM (#4217894)
The Red Sox play the Orioles an Yankees 6 more times too. Their last 24 games are six apiece against the rest of the division.


Did I misread the schedule? I'm sorry, and my advice to everyone is to Ignore me.
   70. Dan Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:18 PM (#4217895)
If it was between the Royals and Pirates, it would still draw energetic discussion and interest. But I don't believe that four of the top five stories in Hot Topics would be devoted to it.


This deal moved one quarter of a billion dollars in contract commitments. The teams involved might make it a bit more featured, but this would be making huge waves regardless of the Red Sox specific involvement.
   71. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:18 PM (#4217897)
And trading Lester during his worst year would be dumb.


Like trading Beckett and Gonzalez during their worst years?

The top three threads in Hot Topics are varieties of this trade-which-is-not-yet. IMHO, Jim (and others) need to find a way to "group" topics so that people who simply don't care about this particular story can still navigate the site and find other discussions.


The much discussed upgrade will allow much more customization to allow more customization. Not quite what you are discussing but the spirit of it.
   72. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:19 PM (#4217898)
If it was between the Royals and Pirates, it would still draw energetic discussion and interest. But I don't believe that four of the top five stories in Hot Topics would be devoted to it.

Well, that's not fair because the Royals and Pirates combined don't have $250M in contracts to trade. Much less $250M all on one side of the deal.

If this was the Yankees, or Phillies, or any big market team making the trade, I think you'd see a bunch of threads.
   73. Jolly Old St. Nick Still Gags in October Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:20 PM (#4217899)
Without reading the comments and without knowing what the Red Sox will do with the $275 M, off the top of my head, I'd say this was a work of daring and genius on the part of their front office that should pay dividends for years to come.
   74. TVerik, the gum-snappin' hairdresser Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:21 PM (#4217901)

If this was the Yankees, or Phillies, or any big market team making the trade, I think you'd see a bunch of threads.


and it would suck, for the double-barreled reasons mentioned above. People who don't want to talk about it have no other way of knowing what discussions are going on, and those who want to know all about it are put into disparate, non-communicative spaces from each other.
   75. DKDC Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:24 PM (#4217902)
I'd say this was a work of daring and genius on the part of their front office that should pay dividends for years to come.


I agree. A lower payroll will make the Red Sox more profitable and will allow the ownership to take larger dividends for years to come.
   76. Drew (Primakov, Gungho Iguanas) Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:25 PM (#4217903)
Like trading Beckett and Gonzalez during their worst years?


Yikes--this year has been so bad that I forgot just how good Beckett was last year. As for Gonzalez, he'd been in the midst of a Gonzalez-of-old hot streak--my guess is that his value was not diminished by his overall yearly performance.

EDIT: Though Beckett isn't really a guy to be relied upon--he's pretty erratic from year to year, and misses time frequently.
   77. DA Baracus is a "bloodthirsty fan of Atlanta." Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:26 PM (#4217905)
People who don't want to talk about it have no other way of knowing what discussions are going on


Hot Topics currently includes articles that haven't been posted in in over 90 minutes. All the conversations taking place right now are readily available.
   78. Drew (Primakov, Gungho Iguanas) Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:33 PM (#4217911)
I'm still a proponent of the unprovable "if the clubhouse is a disaster it won't matter much who's on your team" idea.
   79. Jolly Old St. Nick Still Gags in October Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:36 PM (#4217915)
Without reading the comments and without knowing what the Red Sox will do with the $275 M, off the top of my head I'd say this was a work of daring and genius on the part of their front office that should pay dividends for years to come.


I agree. A lower payroll will make the Red Sox more profitable and will allow the ownership to take larger dividends for years to come.

Is there any particular reason you cut off the first part of what I wrote? Obviously my comment is predicated on the assumption that the owners will do more than simply pocket the money. I can see why a Red Sox fan might be cynical about their team at this point, but it's not as if their last 12 months' performance are a necessary prelude to what's to come ahead. They're certainly well aware of the necessity to keep grinding out winners in order to keep their cash cow flowing, and I doubt if they're going to do anything to hurt that goal.
   80. Jolly Old St. Nick Still Gags in October Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:38 PM (#4217916)
and it would suck, for the double-barreled reasons mentioned above. People who don't want to talk about it have no other way of knowing what discussions are going on, and those who want to know all about it are put into disparate, non-communicative spaces from each other.

Are we really being asked to sympathize with people who choose to block entire subjects from their sidebars?

EDIT: I apologize if I'm missing your point. I've never paid any attention to Furtado's self-sorting gizmos, and I've never blocked any topic myself.
   81. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:45 PM (#4217917)
I thought this was an interesting tidbit from MLBTR:

Bill Shaikin of The Los Angeles Times reports (on Twitter) that the Blue Jays are believed to have claimed De La Rosa off waivers, but he was pulled back and is likely to be included in the deal as a player to be named later.


I didn't know it was that easy to get around a waiver claim. Or maybe I did know and just forgot. And maybe I'll promptly forget again until the next time it comes up.
   82. Joey B. is being stalked by a (Gonfa) loon Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:48 PM (#4217919)
A lower payroll will make the Red Sox more profitable and will allow the ownership to take larger dividends for years to come.

I don't think the Steel Drivin' Man and company are just looking to pocket as much money as possible. The Red Sox aren't the Marlins, they're miserable and humiliated right now being also-rans; these guys want to compete against the Evil Empire, every single year if possible.

Boston is now the clear #1 contender to land Josh Hamilton, and possibly Zack Greinke or another top of the line pitcher as well.
   83. TVerik, the gum-snappin' hairdresser Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:48 PM (#4217920)
You can block topics?

My point was in the other direction; a generally interested baseball fan who has had his fill of this topic sees the site drowned in threads about this particular trade. A corollary of this is that responding to points across-threads is suboptimal for many reasons.
   84. KT's Pot Arb Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:50 PM (#4217922)
Trading for Upton is an intriguing idea, but he's coming off a very disappointing season and it is far from a sure thing that he'll bounce back, particularly in the Boston environment. The fact that the D-Backs management appears to be intent on running him out of town raises some red flags -- while whatever problems Upton is having with the D-Backs may well not be his fault, it doesn't bode particularly well for his ability to handle the situation in Boston.


Upton is almost a lock to bounce back. If you look at his stats he's the exact same player as he's been the 3 years prior, just without the power. His OBP, his speed, his defense, all there. It's very clear he's been nursing at least one or more nagging injuries, specifically to his thumb.

And his red flags are that his owner publicly criticize him for underperforming, and he fired back with

"The good thing is that he was honest,'' Upton said in response to Kendrick's comments. "He didn't sugarcoat it. … And I respect that. He said what he meant, and he said what he felt from his heart, and he's always backed his team.''"


The fans boo him and he says

"You know what? To be honest with you, I don't care anything about what the fans think of me," Upton said "My teammates, my coaches, they know I come in here and I bust it every single day. I come in here and try to do everything I can to help this team and my teammates have my back."


And then he stormed off to take extra batting practice.

You are really worried about getting snookered by Kevin Towers? He was handed the keys to this team and was lucky enough to take it to the NLCS on his first drive. He's spent the rest of his tenure running it into ditches and selling off spare parts for gas. He literally has no clue which players help the team succeed or fail, or how likely they are to rebound, he signed Willie Bloomquist to a multi-year deal for christ sakes.

Kevin Tower is like a caveman confronted with a flashlight. He'd rather trade it for a shiny rock than try to figure out how to turn it on again.
   85. TVerik, the gum-snappin' hairdresser Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:54 PM (#4217925)
If you look at his stats he's the exact same player as he's been the 3 years prior, just without the power. His OBP, his speed, his defense, all there. It's very clear he's been nursing at least one or more nagging injuries


Just to make sure, you're talking about Upton, not Adrian Gonzalez here, right?
   86. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:58 PM (#4217928)
Boston is now the clear #1 contender to land Josh Hamilton


So they had to get out from under these enormous long-term contracts to players on the wrong side of 30 so they could sign players on the wrong side of 30 to enormous long-term contracts?
   87. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:59 PM (#4217932)

Boston is now the clear #1 contender to land Josh Hamilton, and possibly Zack Greinke or another top of the line pitcher as well.


You say that like those players are slam dunk, minimal risk signings.

Also, given how MLB is awash in cash, no one is the clear #1. There are probably 20 clubs that'll be interested in one or the other. e.g. the Pirates and Royals could each afford to give Greinke 6/130 if they choose to.

If the Red Sox are the clear #1, that means they're prepared for a massive overpay. Which gets them right back where they were yesterday.

Edit: Coke to ca. Typed too much.
   88. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: August 25, 2012 at 01:07 PM (#4217936)

I think Danny nailed it in #42:

What contracts do people think Gonzalez, Beckett, and Crawford would get if they were free agents this winter? Seems like a huge overpay for the Dodgers, almost entirely because of Crawford.

I wouldn't be that surprised to see this work out for the Dodgers, but they are taking a ton of financial risk here.
   89. Dock Ellis on Acid Posted: August 25, 2012 at 01:30 PM (#4217955)
@nickcafardo Hearing former Sox players Beckett, Gonzalez and Punto already left Boston.

@dylanohernandez The #Dodgers trade with the #Red Sox is official.
   90. Mike Emeigh Posted: August 25, 2012 at 01:37 PM (#4217961)
I think the Dodgers won this trade. I'm less sold on De La Rosa than most people are - I know there are a lot of people who love the arm but (a) he's still pretty raw and (b) he's not showing that he can get enough command over his arsenal to be even an effective mid-rotation guy long-term, let alone Pedro Martinez (which is one of the stranger comps I've seen). I think the odds are greater than 50-50 that he's going to be a huge disappointment, and he could very well be nothing more than a late-inning non-closing reliever. I'm also not a big fan of Sands or DeJesus, and who knows what Webster is going to be.

Gonzalez is easily the best player in the deal. Beckett and Crawford, I think, will have some bounce back next year.

-- MWE
   91. TVerik, the gum-snappin' hairdresser Posted: August 25, 2012 at 01:40 PM (#4217966)
Mike, if Beckett pitches pretty well for the rest of 2012, he's an absolute asset in the playoffs. He would just need to be better than Aaron Harang to start a playoff game or two.
   92. Dock Ellis on Acid Posted: August 25, 2012 at 01:42 PM (#4217967)
@dylanohernandez #Dodgers turned their attention to Adrian Gonzalez after they failed to land Justin Morneau last week:
   93. John DiFool2 Posted: August 25, 2012 at 02:00 PM (#4217985)
Don't know all the players involved, but the winner is Carl Crawford. He had to get out of that stadium, if there is one stadium in baseball designed to counter all his value/skills, it's Fenway. He's going to go out and post 115+ ops+ and people are going to say getting away from the pressure of Boston is why, when we know the reality is getting away from Fenway is why(of course that is if he ever becomes healthy to play everyday)


I thought the Crawford deal was defensible at the time (even tho it de facto meant ditching Reddick, which I hated), as getting some help for when you are on the road would help the team.

2 years later the Sox have their worst home record like in eons, and even tho Crawford barely had a hand in that, now I just want to say, "The hell with it-get 9 beefy righthanded pull guys, and pork away at the wall all season, pal."

I've been listening to Joy Division's [[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9BP-LIntM6c"]Day of the Lords] on endless repeat this afternoon:

This is the room, the start of it all,
No portrait so fine, only sheets on the wall,
I've seen the nights, filled with bloodsport and pain,
And the bodies obtained, the bodies obtained.

Where will it end? Where will it end?
Where will it end? Where will it end?

These are your friends from childhood, through youth,
Who goaded you on, demanded more proof,
Withdrawal pain is hard, it can do you right in,
So distorted and thin, distorted and thin.

Where will it end? Where will it end?
Where will it end? Where will it end?
   94. John DiFool2 Posted: August 25, 2012 at 02:01 PM (#4217987)
Don't know all the players involved, but the winner is Carl Crawford. He had to get out of that stadium, if there is one stadium in baseball designed to counter all his value/skills, it's Fenway. He's going to go out and post 115+ ops+ and people are going to say getting away from the pressure of Boston is why, when we know the reality is getting away from Fenway is why(of course that is if he ever becomes healthy to play everyday)


I thought the Crawford deal was defensible at the time (even tho it de facto meant ditching Reddick, which I hated), as getting some help for when you are on the road would help the team.

2 years later the Sox have their worst home record like in eons, and even tho Crawford barely had a hand in that, now I just want to say, "The hell with it-get 9 beefy righthanded pull guys, and pork away at the wall all season, pal."

I've been listening to Joy Division's Day of the Lords on endless repeat this afternoon:

This is the room, the start of it all,
No portrait so fine, only sheets on the wall,
I've seen the nights, filled with bloodsport and pain,
And the bodies obtained, the bodies obtained.

Where will it end? Where will it end?
Where will it end? Where will it end?

These are your friends from childhood, through youth,
Who goaded you on, demanded more proof,
Withdrawal pain is hard, it can do you right in,
So distorted and thin, distorted and thin.

Where will it end? Where will it end?
Where will it end? Where will it end?
   95. robinred Posted: August 25, 2012 at 02:03 PM (#4217988)
I see it as too early to say who "won" the trade, but I do see some plusses for the Dodgers here.

I wonder if Crawford will have the surgery? The Dodgers have Victorino, Ethier, and Kemp, so it seems like they could tell Crawford to do it.

Although he seems to have lost some velocity, IMO Beckett will be helped by the league/scenery change, and I think Gonzalez is probably really stoked: this way, he got the huge deal and now he is back in SoCal.
   96. Joe Bivens, Minor Genius Posted: August 25, 2012 at 02:04 PM (#4217989)
What a deal, and what a statement. The Red Sox got rid of a frustratingly erratic pitcher that fans tired of watching give up 2+ runs in the first inning of his starts, a guy who underperformed the last half of last year and the first half of this year after getting off to a great start, exciting the fanbase, but who wasn't here long enough for fans to get emotionally attached to, a guy who probably came here hurt and did next to nothing while tying up lots of money, and Nick Punto, another newbie.

That they didn't get rid of Ellsbury, Lester (yet, and I don't think they will), Pedroia, or Ortiz says, to me, that they were looking to make a big splash and not upset the fans. There was a poll taken last week about what was the most popular sport in town, and football won, easily. If the Red Sox were winning, baseball would have done much better. Whenever the Red Sox are winning, they are kings in this town, even though football is also very popular. But fans' attentions wander elsewhere when the team stinks, and ownership needed to do something to re-stoke interest. This oughta do it, in spades.

Let's see who they get for next year. They better hit a home run.
   97. Joe Bivens, Minor Genius Posted: August 25, 2012 at 02:05 PM (#4217990)
If they're gonna bring back Youk to play first, fine, I like that, but if not....Napoli. I would love to see him play 80 games at Fenway, and see how he'd do.
   98. Dock Ellis on Acid Posted: August 25, 2012 at 02:08 PM (#4217992)
@dylanohernandez Adrian Gonzalez is expected to be at Dodger Stadium in time for the game.
   99. Dock Ellis on Acid Posted: August 25, 2012 at 02:09 PM (#4217993)
I still can't believe this is real. I keep looking at twitter waiting for it to come undone. I'm not convinced until I see each three in Dodger blue.
   100. Dan Posted: August 25, 2012 at 02:10 PM (#4217994)
I wonder if Crawford will have the surgery? The Dodgers have Victorino, Ethier, and Kemp, so it seems like they could tell Crawford to do it.


Crawford already got the surgery on Thursday.
Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 > 

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Marc Sully's not booin'. He's Youkin'.
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogOTP April 2014: BurstNET Sued for Not Making Equipment Lease Payments
(2517 - 1:46pm, Apr 24)
Last: The Good Face

NewsblogOMNICHATTER for 4-24-2014
(11 - 1:45pm, Apr 24)
Last: RoyalsRetro (AG#1F)

NewsblogDoyel: How was Gerrit Cole not suspended? He basically started the brawl
(39 - 1:45pm, Apr 24)
Last: ellsbury my heart at wounded knee

Newsblog4 balls, you’re out!
(59 - 1:44pm, Apr 24)
Last: Sunday silence

NewsblogCalcaterra: Blogger Murray Chass attacks me for bad reporting, ignores quotes, evidence in doing so
(1 - 1:43pm, Apr 24)
Last: Pasta-diving Jeter (jmac66)

NewsblogJosh Lueke Is A Rapist, You Say? Keep Saying It.
(240 - 1:43pm, Apr 24)
Last: CrosbyBird

NewsblogMatt Williams: No problem with Harper's two-strike bunting
(18 - 1:41pm, Apr 24)
Last: Ron J2

NewsblogKeri: Slump City: Why Does the 2014 MLB Season Suddenly Feel Like 1968?
(37 - 1:38pm, Apr 24)
Last: The Clarence Thomas of BBTF (scott)

NewsblogColiseum Authority accuses Athletics of not paying rent
(19 - 1:34pm, Apr 24)
Last: RoyalsRetro (AG#1F)

NewsblogThe Five “Acts” of Ike Davis’s Career, and Why Trading Ike Was a Mistake
(63 - 1:28pm, Apr 24)
Last: Barry`s_Lazy_Boy

NewsblogOT: NBA Monthly Thread - April 2014
(506 - 1:23pm, Apr 24)
Last: Jimmy P

NewsblogMichael Pineda ejected from Red Sox game after pine tar discovered on neck
(89 - 1:19pm, Apr 24)
Last: Avoid running at all times.-S. Paige

NewsblogJonah Keri Extended Interview | Video | Late Night with Seth Meyers | NBC
(12 - 1:05pm, Apr 24)
Last: Greg K

NewsblogToronto Star: Blue Jays pave way for grass at the Rogers Centre
(8 - 12:49pm, Apr 24)
Last: Astroenteritis (tom)

NewsblogOT: The NHL is finally back thread, part 2
(233 - 12:32pm, Apr 24)
Last: PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth)

Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats

 

 

 

 

Page rendered in 0.8680 seconds
52 querie(s) executed