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, December 22, 2012

Speier: Sox land Hanrahan from Pirates

Ben Cherington trades major-league ready, pre-arbitration talent for a relief pitcher.  Because one of these times, it’s got to work out.

According to a major league source, as first reported by Jim Bowden of ESPN (via twitter), the Red Sox and Pirates have reached an agreement on a deal that would bring All-Star closer Joel Hanrahan to Boston. The deal, however, is not yet final. The source confirmed Bowden’s report that the Sox will send outfielder/first baseman Jerry Sands and right-hander Stolmy Pimentel to Pittsburgh, while adding that there are more players involved in the deal than just those three.

Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: December 22, 2012 at 07:22 PM | 53 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: pirates, 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.

   1. The Piehole of David Wells Posted: December 22, 2012 at 07:31 PM (#4331068)
I don't get the negativity. I can't recall how many thousands of times I've read around here that you always trade prospects for proven major league talent. I also don't get why this isn't a good deal for both sides. If the Sox thought Sands would stick at first with his PCL-inflated numbers, they would have tried him out.

And Stolmy Pimentel is the classic binky of Red Sox fanboys. I don't get what's not to like. These aren't top prospects.

Edited for clarity.
   2. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: December 22, 2012 at 07:38 PM (#4331073)
I can't recall how many thousands of times I've read around here that you always trade prospects for proven major league talent
This is obviously not a blanket claim - see Wil Myers / Dayton Moore threads. Trading good pre-arb talent for good relief pitchers is a classic case of the sort of prospect-major leaguer trade that you don't want to be doing.
   3. jacksone (AKA It's OK...) Posted: December 22, 2012 at 07:52 PM (#4331080)
I just don't see the need for a 'closer'. The Sox pen looked like it would be pretty decent - as much as one can project something like that. Who now gets bumped out of it?
   4. Walt Davis Posted: December 22, 2012 at 07:52 PM (#4331081)
Hanrahan is a little odd, sometimes he walks the ballpark and sometimes he doesn't. But you know you're always going to get a lot of Ks and he's usually OK on HR rate. I think he's actually a pretty good reliever.

And Sands isn't Reddick. And the Reddick trade primarily didn't work because Bailey got hurt (not a surprise) and Reddick turned out to be a defensive stud. But then Hanrahan's not as good as Bailey (but probably healthier) and Pimentel could be a decent BIP starter for a few years.

The "more" bit though sounds intriguing and like the "source" is saying "c'mon, we wouldn't trade all that for Hanrahan." But I don't see anything likely to help on Pitt's ML roster and can't see Pitt liking Sands and Pimentel well enough to move a real prospect for them. Jason Grilli? A Brad Lincoln gamble? Tabata as 4th OF?
   5. TerpNats Posted: December 22, 2012 at 07:53 PM (#4331082)
Probably a smart move for the Bucs. Acquire long-term talent; don't let last year's run lull you into a false sense of security. It especially helps that the Bosox have fallen into the big-market trap of short-term gain, and can't afford a repeat of 2012 lest the sellout streak finally come to an end.
   6. The Piehole of David Wells Posted: December 22, 2012 at 07:57 PM (#4331089)
I guess we differ on the meaning of "good pre-arb talent." Sands doesn't seem like he'll amount to much (say a .260 hitter with 15 homers). This is not a valuable trading piece, nor is it talent that's that difficult to come by. Hanrahan-Uehara-Bailey seems like a shutdown reliever corps so I'm happy with that.
   7. The Piehole of David Wells Posted: December 22, 2012 at 07:58 PM (#4331090)
I don't think Hanrahan will be closing. Read reports that he'll be the 7th inning guy.
   8. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: December 22, 2012 at 08:01 PM (#4331093)
Hanrahan-Uehara-Bailey seems like a shutdown reliever corps so I'm happy with that.
They already had Bailey-Uehara-Tazawa. Unless something is pretty seriously wrong with Bailey - and nothing along these lines has been reported - they didn't need another RH reliever.
   9. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: December 22, 2012 at 08:03 PM (#4331094)
To be clear, I'm snarking at this trade not because it's some awful abomination that will destroy the Boston Red Sox. I just think it's a poor value trade in general and an unnecessary trade given the specifics of the Red Sox roster.
   10. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: December 22, 2012 at 08:08 PM (#4331098)
I think MCoA touches on what makes this less than exciting in number 8. The Sox aren't so well stocked that they should be "fixing" what right now looks to be a strength on the team. If there was one area the Sox didn't need an improvement its in the bullpen. I think a Sands/Pimentel package is a very fair turn for Hanrahan, I just don't think it's a good use of resources for the Sox.
   11. Nasty Nate Posted: December 22, 2012 at 08:09 PM (#4331100)
I don't get the negativity. I can't recall how many thousands of times I've read around here that you always trade prospects for proven major league talent. I also don't get why this isn't a good deal for both sides. If the Sox thought Sands would stick at first with his PCL-inflated numbers, they would have tried him out.


The Sox now have no one except David Ortiz who is a firstbaseman until they sign Napoli. Am I forgetting someone?

edit: Gomez I guess.
   12. Darren Posted: December 22, 2012 at 08:12 PM (#4331102)
Hanrahan does seem sort of unnecessary, but Pimental and Sands aren't considered superprospects. I wonder if this helps the 40 man in some way?

Why all of these relievers? They have about 10 to fit in the pen right now.
   13. Dale Sams Posted: December 22, 2012 at 08:14 PM (#4331105)
I would bet that Sands would have accrued more WAR for the Sox as an "Injury-replacement 'oh GD why does Kalish suck, let's give Sands a chance'" player than Han will as a 7th inning reliever.
   14. Darren Posted: December 22, 2012 at 08:16 PM (#4331108)
And the Reddick trade primarily didn't work because Bailey got hurt (not a surprise) and Reddick turned out to be a defensive stud.


This may not be your intent, but this sort of reads as absolving Cherington because these were unforeseeable. Bailey is always hurt and Reddick was already known to be a CF-quality RF with a great, great arm. The more unforeseeable event was Reddick being a good enough hitter for a corner OF spot.
   15. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: December 22, 2012 at 08:18 PM (#4331110)
I wonder if this helps the 40 man in some way?


Well the Sox gain a spot so I guess that helps.

The Sox now have no one except David Ortiz who is a firstbaseman until they sign Napoli. Am I forgetting someone?


I'd bet that even with Napoli the Sox will give Gomes and one of the catchers some time at first base in March. Are we expecting Gomez to still be here? He was mentioned with respect to Japan in October and I would think he might have a chance to make a few bucks with such a move if he's so inclined.
   16. Nasty Nate Posted: December 22, 2012 at 08:24 PM (#4331116)
I'd bet that even with Napoli the Sox will give Gomes and one of the catchers some time at first base in March.


Maybe, but this seems like a backwards approach when you already had Sands who at least has experience at 1B in the last couple of years. Salty hasn't played the position since 2007, and Ross and Lavarnway have never played it.

Who is the other player the Sox are getting?
   17. Dale Sams Posted: December 22, 2012 at 08:25 PM (#4331117)
If the Sox had been a 94 win team the last two years, this probably wouldn't even get a thread...if we're jumpy. overly-critical. It's not our fault.
   18. Tim D Posted: December 22, 2012 at 08:55 PM (#4331135)
Heyman suggests the more players are going from Sox to Bucs, not the other way. I'm guessing low level minor league filler types. I saw Sands play some for LA; he looked like a AAAA type to me. His numbers have been good at all levels though, not just the PCL, so you never know. Pimental is young and throws hard but has not gotten over the Double A hurdle. I suspect the bullpen lurks in his future. Hanrahan was really good a couple of years ago, pretty awful last year. Bucs tried to unload him on Detroit for Porcello and Tigers nearly pissed themselves. Kind of a nothing for nothing trade. If Hanrahan gets it together again, which is quite possible, the Sox could flip him in July for more than they gave up in December.
   19. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: December 22, 2012 at 09:02 PM (#4331138)
hanrahan didn't get any massive favors from pnc. but he also really relies on guys chasing the fastball up. if you can lay off and force him down the strike zone he's hittable. his formula is very simple but when it's working very effective
   20. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: December 22, 2012 at 09:04 PM (#4331141)
Four minor leaguers for a guy that walks 5 per nine innings? I thought the Red Sox were one of those organiztions that wasn't enamored with PROVEN CLOSERS. Has Ed Wade been working incognito?
   21. Nasty Nate Posted: December 22, 2012 at 09:06 PM (#4331145)
Heyman suggests the more players are going from Sox to Bucs, not the other way.


What I read was 2 players to Boston, 4 players to Pittsburgh.
   22. Darren Posted: December 22, 2012 at 09:35 PM (#4331161)
Come on McCutchen!
   23. Walt Davis Posted: December 22, 2012 at 10:35 PM (#4331189)
but this sort of reads as absolving Cherington because these were unforeseeable.

I'm saying Bailey getting hurt again was foreseeable, Reddick being anything special wasn't particularly. ZiPS projected Reddick as VG in the corners or FR in CF. That suggests a guy in the +5-10 defensive range in RF which wasn't gonna do much given his ZiPS projection of an 85 OPS+. Roughly speaking it was the exact same projection as Lorenzo Cain and similar to Nate Schierholz or Cody Ross and a bit better than Reed Johnson. Instead Reddick not only hit better than expected (although he hit pretty much as expected in the 2nd half), he put up a +16 in RF. He was something like 3 WAR better than his projection -- that's unforeseeable.

All I'm really saying is that swapping a 4th OF for a very good reliever is a perfectly OK trade. This wasn't ideal because of Bailey's injury history and maybe because of Reddick's cost/potential combo.

And it's well past time you Sox fans let that one go and stopped bringing it up like some Bagwell for Anderson mistake. You freaked out when he was killing the ball in the first half and it still gets brought up a lot. It was a non-optimal trade, maybe even a bad trade but soon, possibly starting this year, you won't miss Reddick one bit.
   24. JJ1986 Posted: December 22, 2012 at 10:38 PM (#4331190)
Gaby Sanchez seems like a 2013-Red Sox-type.
   25. Rennie's Tenet Posted: December 22, 2012 at 11:26 PM (#4331213)
Come on McCutchen!


He went to the Orioles already.
   26. Toby Posted: December 22, 2012 at 11:33 PM (#4331219)
I was OK with the Reddick trade because it seemed like a reasonable gambit to win in 2012. I would have preferred that the Sox punt 2012 and reload, but I was willing to give Ben the chance. It wasn't unreasonable.

But now it's a year later, and seems even more clear we should be in a punt-this-year mode. So this trade stinks. And yes, part of it is I think Sands is going to be useful, even valuable -- I'm the guy who keeps mentioning him in threads that discuss roster and seem to overlook him. Hanrahan I don't expect to be all that useful -- and he seems redundant anyway. So, yuck.
   27. Dan Posted: December 22, 2012 at 11:43 PM (#4331226)
Seems like its taking an awfully long time to get the full details on this trade.
   28. Dale Sams Posted: December 22, 2012 at 11:51 PM (#4331234)
And it's well past time you Sox fans let that one go and stopped bringing it up like some Bagwell for Anderson mistake


I will stop bringing it up when we stop trading field players for relievers.

So now, it's Melancon, Sands and Stoley (and someone else) for Hanrahan and (someone else).

So as of right now, Hanrahan, (a guy with 4.6 WAR the last three years) is worth Jed Lowrie, Kyle Weiland, Sands and Stoley.*

*Yes, that was completly irrational. FIeld players for relievers make me that way.

   29. Elvis Posted: December 23, 2012 at 12:17 AM (#4331248)
As a Mets fan, I'm thrilled to get Hanrahan out of the NL. In the past three years, the Mets are 1-19 with 8 Ks against Hanrahan. If he's your 7th inning reliever you've got a pretty good pen.
   30. Walt Davis Posted: December 23, 2012 at 12:58 AM (#4331278)
Now I'll join with Dale. Melancon and Hanrahan are the same pitcher. I keep looking at Pitt's roster and I don't see who the Sox would get back that would make any difference. Even big names like Walker or Alvarez don't fit for the Sox. Jones or Sanchez make a little sense I guess but primarily only if they're planning on trading Salty ... and of course the Pirates need all 4 of those guys. Karstens?

Somebody is doing something counter-productive here.

Seems like its taking an awfully long time to get the full details on this trade.

Maybe it's the new strategy. Leak part of a trade, wait a day to see what the internet geniuses and the fan base have to say, balance the trade out. :-)

Or, maybe, everybody in MLB went on holiday Friday at 2 and this will all get wrapped up on boxing day.
   31. Crispix reaches boiling point with lackluster play Posted: December 23, 2012 at 01:07 AM (#4331289)
Karstens is a free agent. Maybe the Red Sox would want Mike McKenry in case the Napoli deal falls through and they're left with only five catchers. Or the very versatile Josh Harrison.
   32. Ray (RDP) Posted: December 23, 2012 at 01:25 AM (#4331296)
Feh.
   33. Steve Balboni's Personal Trainer Posted: December 23, 2012 at 10:46 AM (#4331388)
I'm not saying people have to like this trade, but the Red Sox are struggling to find roster space on the 40-man for Napoli and Drew. There are two guys on the 40-man who have nothing to do with the team in 2013 (and probably beyond): Sands and Pimental. They were probably going to lose them, anyway.

Melanson, they think, is a lost cause. Besides, if you get rid of Sands and Pimental to open up two spots on the 40-man, but then you add a relief pitcher, you still need to find a spot for Napoli or Drew...so you throw in Melanson, who you don't want, anyway.

Again, you may not agree that all of this is worth it simply for 40-man roster space, but I think the team is being very transparent about why they are doing this. They open up space, and in exchange, they also get an upgrade from Melanson to Hanrahan. If the team is out of the playoff hunt at the deadline, they can trade him to a contender needing a closer. If they keep him all year, they can probably get a draft pick out of it. If Hanrahan sucks, they let him go at the end of the year. Whatever.

All this said: I haven't been this unexcited about an upcoming Red Sox season since at least...1994.
   34. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: December 23, 2012 at 11:03 AM (#4331392)
Seems like its taking an awfully long time to get the full details on this trade.


Mike Napoli scoffs at you.

Including Melancon makes no sense to me. I agree with the post above that there is a chance that Melancon will be as good as Hanrahan this year.

Disagree with Balboni though. I think it's going to be an interesting season. I think we can compete which would be great fun and if we don't it will be fun to see some of the kids come up as the season progresses.
   35. Darren Posted: December 23, 2012 at 12:52 PM (#4331449)
Wait, Walt chews me out for freaking out praises DALE? Jeez Luis Rivera! :)

Walt, I think if you look back at what I wrote about the Reddick deal at the time, and even since Bailey injury, I've been pretty fair to Cherington about it. I think he was in a bit of a bind and took a chance on Bailey's health. It didn't work out, which happens. But let's remember, it's completely fair to judge a trade with some of the benefit of hindsight. Based on the publicly available stats, Reddick was not projected to be special. But Cherington has a lot more info than we have. If he makes a trade that initially looks okay to me as an outsider, then turns bad, it's worth considering that he blew it. That's especially true when he made other, similarly bad deals in the same offseason.

That doesn't make this a Bagwell-for-Andersen deal (not yet!), but it's a bad deal and part of a bad pattern that, hopefully, this deal won't continue.
   36. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: December 23, 2012 at 01:35 PM (#4331470)
Maybe it's the new strategy. Leak part of a trade, wait a day to see what the internet geniuses and the fan base have to say, balance the trade out. :-)


I would assume that teams do that. At least it seems like a reasonable strategy. You don't want to make moves because the fans say so but it can't hurt to get some free analysis. Using this trade as an example you float it out there and if the opinion about the deal is overwhelmingly against it I'm not saying you completely backpedal but maybe you at least take a moment to reconsider. Maybe you still go through with it but you go with eyes wide open.

Paralysis by analysis can be a real concern but at the same time I think getting as much input as possible is a good thing.
   37. Dale Sams Posted: December 23, 2012 at 01:44 PM (#4331475)
Walt chews me out for freaking out praises DALE? Jeez Luis Rivera


It's not freaking out if the sky really does fall ;>
   38. Mike Emeigh Posted: December 23, 2012 at 02:28 PM (#4331515)
The question here is whether Hanrahan's upward spike in walk rate in 2012 is an aberration or a reversion to type.

The first name that came to mind when I heard about this rumored trade, quite honestly, was Heathcliff Slocumb. Slocumb had a couple of years at the same ages that were like Hanrahan's Pirates career in some ways - came over in a trade after washing out and struggling with his control, harnessed his issues well enough to have a couple of good seasons in relief, then saw a regression in his strike-throwing ability while still putting up decent numbers as a closer. The next season (the year he was traded for Varitek and Lowe) he went totally south, and never really got back to where he was.

Melancon - assuming the rumors are true and he's included in the deal - is roughly now where Hanrahan was at the time the Pirates acquired him in 2009, with a very similar set of skills and some very similar issues, although Melancon's problem isn't so much missing the zone as it is location in the zone. I could see Melancon having two years much like Hanrahan's last two, and I can also see him totally blowing up a la Slocumb. But I see Hanrahan as much more of a blowup risk.

Sands and Pimentel are kind of 'meh'. Sands has never impressed me all that much; he doesn't really have a defensive position and he has holes in his swing that can be exploited. Pimentel doesn't have a dominant out pitch and hasn't shown any signs of developing one - the only thing that he has going for him is that he's still pretty young.

I want to see who the other two players are in this deal, but right now it's more of a "shrug shoulders" deal than anything else.

-- MWE
   39. base ball chick Posted: December 23, 2012 at 03:37 PM (#4331544)
here and i thought jerry sands was gonna be the new rsox 1B - like i am not understanding who IS gonna play there seeing as how you need SOMEbody to catch the ball of there will be an awful lot of outs not made

is napoli supposed to be a full time 1B? so scoscia was right? are they gonna play someone there who hasn't played there since like high school or little league or something?

because trust me on this, there really ARE guys who can NOT play 1B to save their lives (see mark loretta/jose vizcaino to start with)

- oh yeah - and melancon was not a bad reliever with the astros and he might could do better with a different pitching coach
   40. JJ1986 Posted: December 23, 2012 at 03:54 PM (#4331550)
Right now, I imagine Lavarnway is the guy behind Napoli, although he has not played anywhere but catcher as a pro.
   41. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: December 23, 2012 at 04:43 PM (#4331570)
is napoli supposed to be a full time 1B?
Yes. The Sox signed Napoli to play first base. He seems to have some serious durability issues when he's catching, and they're hoping they can get 140 games out of his bat if he doesn't have to catch anymore.

I doubt Lavarnway figures into the 1B plans at all. He seems like a Piazza type, in that he's a mediocre athlete who's learned to catch semi-competently, and he'd actually be terrible at 1B. He certainly won't be taking it up at the major league level without a lot of time at the position in the minors.

With Sands out of the picture, the Sox will need a 24th man who can back up 1B and pinch-hit. It might be Mauro Gomez.
   42. Walt Davis Posted: December 23, 2012 at 06:50 PM (#4331613)
Wait, Walt chews me out for freaking out praises DALE? Jeez Luis Rivera! :)

I can't keep you guys straight anyway. But I didn't praise Dale :-) ... I was just revising my opinion of the trade with Melancon in. A couple of iffy prospects (is Sands even one anymore?) for a good reliever (with question marks as MWE points out) seems like a perfectly OK trade to me. But when the Sox throw in an equally good reliever (with question marks) it seems like they're just giving Sands and Pimentel away.

The 40-man roster point is a good one though -- maybe they were going to be giving those two away anyway. If so, this goes back to the middle of the "meh" pile -- the Sox prefer Hanrahan to Melancon (understandable even if they end up wrong) and are willing to throw in parts that are superfluous to them to make it happen. If there's a pre-40-man Sands or Pimentel equivalent coming back, it makes plenty of sense for the Sox.

And, yes, I agree we can apply some hindsight to trades but I don't think it helps us much until we have enough trades to evaluate in hindsight. If Cherington regularly swaps 4th OF prospect types for relievers but those 4th OF types keep turning into starters then obviously there's a major problem. But swapping a 4th OF prospect for a good reliever (or maybe even excellent in Bailey's case) is usually a smart move.

And who knew Pimentel was such a popular name. There have been tons in the minors. Also an unlucky name as none have made it to the majors yet.
   43. Darren Posted: December 23, 2012 at 07:40 PM (#4331630)
If Cherington regularly swaps 4th OF prospect types for relievers but those 4th OF types keep turning into starters then obviously there's a major problem. But swapping a 4th OF prospect for a good reliever (or maybe even excellent in Bailey's case) is usually a smart move.
I think this is somewhere else we diverge a bit. I don't think of Reddick as a 4th OF type. He was BA's #75 prospect before 2010, was an above average starter in 2011. I'd say that at that point, I'd say he looked like an averagish OF.
   44. clowns to the left of me; STEAGLES to the right Posted: December 23, 2012 at 07:48 PM (#4331639)
i'm probably the only one, but every time i read "hanrahan", my next thought is almost invariably "lisa needs braces".
   45. chris p Posted: December 23, 2012 at 09:23 PM (#4331680)
And the Reddick trade primarily didn't work because Bailey got hurt (not a surprise) and Reddick turned out to be a defensive stud.


This may not be your intent, but this sort of reads as absolving Cherington because these were unforeseeable. Bailey is always hurt and Reddick was already known to be a CF-quality RF with a great, great arm. The more unforeseeable event was Reddick being a good enough hitter for a corner OF spot.


this.

actually, it was worse. after 2011, it was pretty clear josh reddick had at least 3 major league skills. he had that great arm, and could hack it well enough in cf to be a clear plus in right, so at the very least he was outstanding defensively in right. but he also showed that hte power was there when he made contact--the cliche about how the ball jumps off his bat was and is true here. it was just a question of whether he could make enough contact, and given how well he did everything else, the bar was very low. after 2011 he was a cost controlled major league right fielder, with some serious upside offensively.

sands can't play defense and hasn't set the world on fire with his bat, and stolmy might turn into a nice reliever. unless the other players the sox gave up are something, what's not to like about this deal?
   46. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: December 23, 2012 at 10:11 PM (#4331702)
he had that great arm, and could hack it well enough in cf to be a clear plus in right, so at the very least he was outstanding defensively in right. but he also showed that hte power was there when he made contact


The same was said of Brandon Moss, and he didn't do #### with the Pirates.
   47. chris p Posted: December 23, 2012 at 10:19 PM (#4331705)
The same was said of Brandon Moss, and he didn't do #### with the Pirates.

not really.

moss was never considered much of a defender. he was always a corner outfielder in the minors, and nobody ever talked about his arm like they did reddick. as for his offense, we thought he might be ok to pretty good. reddick was more of a feast or famine prospect ... real big league power ... seriously questionable contact ability.
   48. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: December 23, 2012 at 11:26 PM (#4331736)
i'm probably the only one, but every time i read "hanrahan", my next thought is almost invariably "lisa needs braces".


Well I will now. Thanks a lot.
   49. Walt Davis Posted: December 24, 2012 at 05:19 PM (#4332010)
I think this is somewhere else we diverge a bit. I don't think of Reddick as a 4th OF type. He was BA's #75 prospect before 2010, was an above average starter in 2011. I'd say that at that point, I'd say he looked like an averagish OF.

Again, he was projected by ZiPS to about a 85 OPS+ for 2012 with VG not EX defense in a corner. Good defense and an 85 OPS+ is 4th OF material. He was a guy who hit 243 without a lot of walks at AAA. In the second half last year, he hit 215/256/391. His career batting line is roughly Francoeurian.

You guys may have gotten this one right, maybe Reddick will continue to hit well enough to start and continue to put up 2+ WAR for a while. But there's a very good chance that the Red Sox projections (statistical and scouts) pegged him as 4th OF material because ZiPS certainly did. Obviously every FO would benefit from listening to us but the Sox are not alone in ignoring our wisdom.
   50. Don Malcolm Posted: December 24, 2012 at 07:49 PM (#4332035)
The Sox appear to be trying to do what the A's did last year--double down on platoon advantages and focus on hitters who can hit HRs. Their biggest problem is still in the starting rotation, and they're not working with a forgiving home park the way the A's are.

Sands looks as though he can hit lefties, so he could be useful to the Pirates, but he has to be able to hit HRs. On the Sox, he was redundant with Gomes and Gomez, so if they could get someone who might be part of a closer committee, it's not such a big deal for them to give him up. He'll probably get a couple of years to create a niche for himself in the big leagues now that he's with the Bucs--that might not have happened in Boston unless injuries mounted up.

   51. asinwreck Posted: December 24, 2012 at 10:00 PM (#4332073)
When I see "Hanrahan," I think of Reg Dunlop.
   52. Willie Mayspedes Posted: December 25, 2012 at 01:16 AM (#4332133)
there are guys who can't play 1B


It's incredibly hard
   53. Nasty Nate Posted: December 26, 2012 at 02:13 PM (#4332493)
It's reported that the other player being sent to Boston is middle-infielder Brock Holt. Here is a write-up about him from Sickels.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Forsch 10 From Navarone (Dayn)
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogOTP - July 2014: Republicans Lose To Democrats For Sixth Straight Year In Congressional Baseball Game
(2704 - 9:26am, Jul 22)
Last: Lassus

NewsblogSports Reference Blog: 1901-02 Orioles Removed from Yankees History
(5 - 9:26am, Jul 22)
Last: Pat Rapper's Delight

NewsblogThree Moves The Red Sox Should Make - Tony Massarotti - Boston.com
(10 - 9:23am, Jul 22)
Last: snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster)

NewsblogPoll: Does Citizens Bank Park really need metal detectors at the gates?
(2 - 9:18am, Jul 22)
Last: bobm

NewsblogMLB.COM - Toman: Lewis takes exception with Rasmus' bunt
(121 - 9:17am, Jul 22)
Last: They paved Misirlou, put up a parking lot

NewsblogMisremembering Mantle's Final Season
(33 - 9:13am, Jul 22)
Last: They paved Misirlou, put up a parking lot

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 7-22-2014
(7 - 9:00am, Jul 22)
Last: RMc's desperate, often sordid world

NewsblogTrading for Price would be right move for Cubs | FOX Sports
(55 - 8:58am, Jul 22)
Last: snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster)

NewsblogBraves release Dan Uggla
(37 - 8:40am, Jul 22)
Last: formerly dp

NewsblogOT: The Soccer Thread July, 2014
(280 - 8:36am, Jul 22)
Last: The Clarence Thomas of BBTF (scott)

SABR - BBTF ChapterWho's going to SABR??
(36 - 7:51am, Jul 22)
Last: MHS

NewsblogTony Oliva turns 76; Gardenhire: 'He should be in hall of fame'
(2 - 7:44am, Jul 22)
Last: Rants Mulliniks

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread- July 2014
(804 - 6:58am, Jul 22)
Last: Commissioner Bud Black Beltre Hillman

NewsblogJim Bouton Still As Opinionated As Ever
(136 - 2:05am, Jul 22)
Last: greenback calls it soccer

NewsblogOMNICHATTER 7-21
(34 - 1:44am, Jul 22)
Last: Dale Sams

Page rendered in 0.6396 seconds
52 querie(s) executed