Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Sox Therapy > Discussion
Sox Therapy
— Where Thinking Red Sox Fans Obsess about the Sox

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. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: August 02, 2010 at 09:06 PM (#3606428)
And I see from the Globe that while I was writing this, the Sox DL'd Cameron and recalled Nava.

Ellsbury's rehab is apparently going well in Pawtucket. Not to compare the two.
   2. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: August 02, 2010 at 09:13 PM (#3606433)
Why weren't they in on Snyder? All Arizona got was an OK RP and a bunch of expiring contracts to balance this year's money.
   3. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: August 02, 2010 at 09:27 PM (#3606444)
A merely above-replacement backstop could have netted the Sox an extra win in July.


This makes the assumption that there was one to be had. Just to use Snapper's example of Snyder he netted the Diamondbacks DJ Carrasco. He may not be great but he's decent and probably has been better than anyone other than Bard/Papelbon in the Red Sox bullpen. I doubt the D-Backs would have done this deal for Ramon Ramirez, maybe they would have for Hideki Okajima.

As for rushing Cameron back I think that was obviously a mistake but at the time I think the Sox felt they had to do it, particularly if the player himself was eager to come back. That outfield was thin and as great as Nava was I think the Sox (with some justification) figured Cameron would be the better player. It didn't work out of course.

I wish the Sox could have done something to help the bullpen. That to me is the biggest failing of not just the trade deadline but of the off-season. I think that was a fairly predictable hole and the Sox left that open.
   4. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: August 02, 2010 at 09:29 PM (#3606448)
This makes the assumption that there was one to be had. Just to use Snapper's example of Snyder he netted the Diamondbacks DJ Carrasco. He may not be great but he's decent and probably has been better than anyone other than Bard/Papelbon in the Red Sox bullpen. I doubt the D-Backs would have done this deal for Ramon Ramirez, maybe they would have for Hideki Okajima.

But, I don't think Arizona cares about an RP, per se. Some equivalent prospect could have done it.
   5. Nasty Nate Posted: August 02, 2010 at 09:38 PM (#3606454)
But, I don't think Arizona cares about an RP, per se. Some equivalent prospect could have done it.


True. And I'm sure the Sox could have done that on July 31st. But the price probably would have been higher a month earlier when they needed a C.
   6. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: August 02, 2010 at 09:40 PM (#3606455)
I'm not talking about Snyder, though. Snyder's a good catcher. I'm talking about a bad catcher who simply reaches that level of performance where his every appearance doesn't bring shame upon his family for raising him. That's what the Sox needed. The idea that that wasn't out there I simply cannot accept.
   7. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: August 02, 2010 at 09:49 PM (#3606460)
JCYS- I'm not particularly inclined to give the Red Sox training staff the benefit of the doubt. Mike Cameron has shown, in the last two months, that he wasn't ready yet. They said he was. They were wrong.
   8. Steve Balboni's Personal Trainer Posted: August 02, 2010 at 10:46 PM (#3606494)
A quick look at the relief pitchers available at the deadline suggests Epstein would've largely been moving decks chair around the Titanic. I mean, Chad Qualls? Whose place is he taking? Delcarmen? Okajima? Richardson? The guy's ERA this year is a run...per friggin' inning!

And one of the few relievers who might've been a meaningful upgrade, Scott Downs, was reportedly going to cost everybody waaay too much. If you're Epstein, and your team has maybe a 1-in-4 chance of catching the Rays or Yankees, how much do you want to pay for a pitcher who will pitch, what, 30 innings this year?

It's a tough place to be for the Sox this year, because you're expecting everybody back, so you're not looking to fill holes for very long...but the month of July was probably the month that cost them a playoff spot, and I'm not sure there are enough games to make up for that month - not when the three best teams in baseball might be in the same division...
   9. Answer Guy Posted: August 02, 2010 at 11:04 PM (#3606501)
It's a tough place to be for the Sox this year, because you're expecting everybody back, so you're not looking to fill holes for very long...but the month of July was probably the month that cost them a playoff spot, and I'm not sure there are enough games to make up for that month - not when the three best teams in baseball might be in the same division...


I think that's the bottom line. Even overlooking the injuries they were kinda caught in between. The odds are still good enough that, as July 31 approached, selling (not that there's much other teams would want that the Sox should have been willing to part with) didn't really seem like the right move. Nor did the odds seem good enough to mortgage any potential 2011-2013 upside for a better shot at postseason glory in 2010.
   10. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: August 02, 2010 at 11:16 PM (#3606513)
It's a tough place to be for the Sox this year, because you're expecting everybody back, so you're not looking to fill holes for very long...but the month of July was probably the month that cost them a playoff spot, and I'm not sure there are enough games to make up for that month - not when the three best teams in baseball might be in the same division...

Agree with this. The time to make moves was 4-6 weeks ago.

They probably should have looked at more "expensive" acquisitions that would have been controlled for 2011, at least. Like the aforementioned Snyder and maybe a LF (assuming Ellsbury is trade bait).
   11. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: August 02, 2010 at 11:19 PM (#3606519)
The best LF on the market was David DeJesus. Giving up real talent to acquire him (or a worse player) and then committing to him (or a worse player) for 2011 would have been a really bad idea. The trade market was not there for a club that wanted to upgrade in the outfield.
   12. Darren Posted: August 03, 2010 at 11:04 AM (#3606859)
Good post.

What don't you like about DeJesus? At the very least, we could have all run around saying "You don't #### with DeJesus!"
   13. Lassus Posted: August 03, 2010 at 11:28 AM (#3606861)
Rumors had them linked to the Mets for Barajas

WTF, seriously? And they couldn't manage to pawn him off on you guys? Ugh.
   14. Chip Posted: August 03, 2010 at 11:44 AM (#3606864)
What don't you like about DeJesus? At the very least, we could have all run around saying "You don't #### with DeJesus!"


Can we have any doubt that if they had somehow swung a trade for DeJesus six weeks ago he would have run into a wall and knocked himself out for the season in the very first inning of his very first game in a Sox uniform?
   15. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: August 03, 2010 at 12:14 PM (#3606868)
The best LF on the market was David DeJesus. Giving up real talent to acquire him (or a worse player) and then committing to him (or a worse player) for 2011 would have been a really bad idea.

Wow! I just don't see that.

DeJesus is a very nice, consistent, 3-3.5 WAR player, with a $6M club option for 2011. He'd have been a fine LF for the Sox, and could back up CF, allowing you to have a better bat as your 4th OF.

Unless you believe his injury was predestined, I don't see why you wouldn't want him on your team.
   16. Answer Guy Posted: August 03, 2010 at 12:32 PM (#3606875)
Unless you believe his injury was predestined, I don't see why you wouldn't want him on your team.


There's nothing wrong with having DeJesus on your team, especially if you're not asking him to carry the offense. The issue is what he would have cost, precisely because, as you say, he has a contract situation that would make him a sound acqusition for many teams.
   17. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: August 03, 2010 at 12:45 PM (#3606879)
There's nothing wrong with having DeJesus on your team, especially if you're not asking him to carry the offense. The issue is what he would have cost, precisely because, as you say, he has a contract situation that would make him a sound acqusition for many teams.

Sure. If the Royals were unreasonable that's one thing, but that's not the tone I get from [11]. Maybe I'm wrong.
   18. Answer Guy Posted: August 03, 2010 at 01:05 PM (#3606886)
The other thing is that perhaps management wasn't ready to write Cameron off, which I've been ready to do for a while. Sometimes signings don't work out. Someone at that age with injuries that won't go away is not someone you should be counting on to fill that spot.

I'm ready to see Bill Hall finally hit the bench. That is going to happen at some point this season, right?
   19. John DiFool2 Posted: August 03, 2010 at 01:19 PM (#3606896)
For a fill-in-everywhere utilityman, Hall's been pretty good. Yes, a .236 BA and 100 OPS+ aren't world-beating numbers, but plenty of teams have gotten much worse production out of a bench player forced to become a semi-regular due to injuries.
   20. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: August 03, 2010 at 01:44 PM (#3606912)
For a fill-in-everywhere utilityman, Hall's been pretty good.
I'd say just plain great. Having a guy who can play anywhere and put up league average hitting numbers is incredibly valuable - basically, this is as valuable as a bench player can possibly be. The Sox would be in much, much worse shape right now if it weren't for Hall.

It appears to me that Hall is still going to start in the outfield against many LHP, and he's going to give Jed Lowrie regular rest. That's the right job for him.

EDIT: On DeJesus, I was assuming he'd cost Kalish or Kelly. He has somewhat less value to the Red Sox because in theory they've already got three outfielders about as good as him signed for 2011. But I overstated things - DeJesus on the cheap, certainly, sign me up.
   21. Paxton Crawford Ranch Posted: August 03, 2010 at 01:46 PM (#3606913)
My complaint here is rather that it’s extremely hard to believe that running Cameron back into the lineup when he was obviously not yet healthy was the optimal arrangement of resources. Another month or two of rest and rehab for the veteran, and the Sox might have a good CF ready down the stretch, with no cost to the team during that extra month or two.

My understanding is that Cameron won't be right until his torn abdominal muscle is repaired surgically, and the level he played at in June and July was as good as it gets until he has that surgery, regardless of the amount of rest and rehab. The Sox and Cameron decided that it was better to get whatever they could from him while the team was short handed rather than lose him for the season. Can't say I blame them, considering the other OF options. The Sox just got stuck in a situation where anyone noticeably better than what they had (DeJesus, Downs, Snyder) would have cost them a top prospect (Kelly, Kalish, Iglesias, Rizzo) at the time they actually needed to make the deal, but by the time the price dropped the need would be gone (or in the case of Downs, still not worth it).
   22. Spaceman Posted: August 03, 2010 at 04:23 PM (#3607098)
The best LF on the market was David DeJesus. Giving up real talent to acquire him (or a worse player) and then committing to him (or a worse player) for 2011 would have been a really bad idea.

Wow! I just don't see that.

KC would had been smart to accept Nava straight up for him, if the offer was ever presented. Yeah, think about that for a sec.

Your 2012 Boston Red Sox OF: Nava, Ellsbury and Kalish. I am an unabashed Nava fanboy.
   23. Paxton Crawford Ranch Posted: August 03, 2010 at 04:50 PM (#3607130)
Nava's a fine player to have on the bench or stashed in AAA but I would be very surprised if he ever became a regular. His .400 BABIP is unsustainable and his MLE in Pawtucket was 252/321/390. He's got two option years left and is a worthwhile use of a a 40 man roster spot, but let's not go all crazy here.
   24. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: August 03, 2010 at 04:52 PM (#3607133)
EDIT: On DeJesus, I was assuming he'd cost Kalish or Kelly. He has somewhat less value to the Red Sox because in theory they've already got three outfielders about as good as him signed for 2011. But I overstated things - DeJesus on the cheap, certainly, sign me up.

OK, sensibile.

Do you really think Ellsbury and Cameron will both be if the OF next year? I was assuming Ellsbury is trade bait.
   25. Smiling Joe Hesketh Posted: August 03, 2010 at 04:58 PM (#3607140)
Ellsbury's value is at a nadir at this point. He won't be traded due to that, I assume the Sox will let him play again next year to rebuild his value.
   26. Smiling Joe Hesketh Posted: August 03, 2010 at 05:00 PM (#3607143)
Your 2012 Boston Red Sox OF: Nava, Ellsbury and Kalish. I am an unabashed Nava fanboy.

I would be higher on Nava if he wasn't Hermida-esque in the outfield.
   27. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: August 03, 2010 at 05:09 PM (#3607156)
If the Sox can sign Werth/Crawford or Kalish can establish himself I would not be the least bit surprised to see the Sox eat Cameron's contract as they've done with Renteria and Lugo.

I think with the lost year Ellsbury is effectively untradeable. He is no superstar but neither is he a bum and the Sox would be nuts to just give him away but at the same time I think any team would be equally nuts to give anything of substance for a guy coming off a year like this.
   28. Paxton Crawford Ranch Posted: August 03, 2010 at 05:24 PM (#3607176)
Ellsbury's value is certainly down now, but he's going to be back any day now and playing center field -- if he stays healthy and hits 300/360/420 with 20 steals and good defense over the final 50+ games his value will be right back at where it was before the injury. Despite all the hand-wringing, breaking your ribs in a collision is the very definition of a traumatic, not a chronic, injury.
   29. Infinite Joost (Voxter) Posted: August 03, 2010 at 06:21 PM (#3607263)
Unless you believe his injury was predestined


Not counting 2004, when he didn't become a starter until July, David DeJesus has averaged 128 games a year. His injury was not predestined, but highly predictable.
   30. Spaceman Posted: August 03, 2010 at 06:28 PM (#3607277)
I wanted this to work but Pawtucket kinda screwed it up:
His MLE for Salem (from Lancaster) was .376/.453. He hit .434/.495 (+11%)
His MLE for Portland (from Salem) was .396/.433. He hit .479/.568 (+21%)
His MLE for Pawtucket (from Portland) was .456/.531. He hit .380/.481 (-12%)
HIs MLE for Boston (from Pawtucket) was .331/.412. He has hit .383/.452 (+12%)

For the most part, it does still show that Smith's MLE is Nava's #####.

Interestingly enough, after 884 AB's, Nava has never had an BABIP under .382 as a pro. Is that an indictment of mL BABIP or is Nava Irish?
   31. Petunia inquires about ponies Posted: August 03, 2010 at 06:35 PM (#3607285)
Can we have any doubt that if they had somehow swung a trade for DeJesus six weeks ago he would have run into a wall third baseman and knocked himself out for the season in the very first inning of his very first game in a Sox uniform?

FTFY
   32. Famous Original Joe C Posted: August 03, 2010 at 08:14 PM (#3607390)
Youkilis to the DL with a thumb, Lowell activated and to play 1st tonight.

Season's over.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Backlasher
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats

 

 

 

 

Page rendered in 0.3765 seconds
41 querie(s) executed