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.

Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 > 
   1. Toby Posted: November 17, 2006 at 06:56 PM (#2240496)
And thanks for the tip, Nate.
   2. PJ Martinez Posted: November 17, 2006 at 07:01 PM (#2240503)
Wow, that'd be great. I'd heard rumors of 4/48, which I was ok with, too.

If these rumors are true, they seem to suggest Drew is confident he can put up some good numbers in Boston the next two years, and cash in once more before his career is over. I like the shortness of the deal for Boston, and I like the incentive it provides for Drew-- no sitting on his laurels if he wants another big paycheck.
   3. The Piehole of David Wells Posted: November 17, 2006 at 07:02 PM (#2240506)
let's just pretend for a minute that we get both drew and matsuzaka, that puts the sox at a disadvantage for trading them. having a glut of outfielders may actually be an asset come trade deadline, and may enable them to trade for what would be an otherwise expensive part. if they can afford to hang on to all of these guys, i think they should. i really don't think that the sox need to be as conscious of $ to wins as other teams do, and i see no problem with carrying extra outfielders/dh types who could be starters on other teams.
   4. Van Lingle Mungo Jerry Posted: November 17, 2006 at 07:03 PM (#2240509)
$30 million will buy a lot of Ace bandages.
   5. The Piehole of David Wells Posted: November 17, 2006 at 07:03 PM (#2240510)
let's just pretend for a minute that we get both drew and matsuzaka, that puts the sox at a disadvantage for trading them. having a glut of outfielders may actually be an asset come trade deadline, and may enable them to trade for what would be an otherwise expensive part. if they can afford to hang on to all of these guys, i think they should. i really don't think that the sox need to be as conscious of $ to wins as other teams do, and i see no problem with carrying extra outfielders/dh types who could be starters on other teams.
   6. The Piehole of David Wells Posted: November 17, 2006 at 07:04 PM (#2240512)
sorry for repeat post. stupid stolen and unpredictable wifi.
   7. Dewey, Soupuss Not Doomed to Succeed Posted: November 17, 2006 at 07:05 PM (#2240513)
The White Sox would probably be very interested in Coco Crisp...
   8. base ball chick Posted: November 17, 2006 at 07:07 PM (#2240518)
it is gonna be fun to watch drew and the boston media.

i can just see it the first time drew has some lil ache and sits out
   9. ellsbury my heart at wounded knee Posted: November 17, 2006 at 07:08 PM (#2240520)
Assuming this gets done and Wily Mo isn't traded for a SS or RP or something, I picture lots of days off for Drew, with Wily Mo as 4th OF+. I also picture CHB tearing Drew a new one the 2nd ot 3rd time he gets injured.
   10. shoewizard Posted: November 17, 2006 at 07:15 PM (#2240526)
You guys saw his ZIPS right?

Even if you park adjust those up a bit for Boston, if thats what he does up there, the faithful will not be happy.
   11. BTF's left-wing cheering section (formerly_dp) Posted: November 17, 2006 at 07:19 PM (#2240531)
This makes the Jays signing of Thomas look worse- I'd pay $3 M more/yr to have the "security" of Drew's health vs. Thomas's, plus there's the fact that Drew has a position...
   12. Danny Posted: November 17, 2006 at 07:22 PM (#2240533)
Think the Sox would be interested in something like Calero/Kennedy for WIly Mo?
   13. Nasty Nate Posted: November 17, 2006 at 07:29 PM (#2240539)
what does this mean for Manny/Coco/WilyMo?


It means they trade Manny . . . and Gable Kapler gets 300 PA's when Drew gets hurt.

seriously I like the length of the deal for the Sox. and Drew gets another shot at free agency before his age 33 season.
   14. Van Lingle Mungo Jerry Posted: November 17, 2006 at 07:35 PM (#2240542)
This makes the Jays signing of Thomas look worse- I'd pay $3 M more/yr to have the "security" of Drew's health vs. Thomas's, plus there's the fact that Drew has a position...

I know you used quote marks and all, but would that be the same J.D. Drew who's averaged 118 games played per sesaon the last six years?
   15. realteamcoach Posted: November 17, 2006 at 07:41 PM (#2240544)
And the Cubs fail to get another big-name FA. Drew and Zito is who they should sign, and they will not get either.

Great deal for Boston. They will also gain picks when they let him go in a couple of years.
   16. Pleasant Nate (Upgraded from 'Nate') Posted: November 17, 2006 at 07:41 PM (#2240545)
I don't know what it's going to be, but a trade with the Astros seems like a decent bet at some point this off-season. They've got relievers we could use, they hate Ensberg, and we have Lowell/Coco/Wily Mo which could all help them.
   17. PJ Martinez Posted: November 17, 2006 at 07:46 PM (#2240548)
I realize Drew's got a bad injury history, but just to make the more optimistic case: In 2005, he broke his wrist, playing only 72 games. Bu the year before that he played in 145 games, and the year after he played in 146. Why shouldn't one expect him to play in about 140 games next year, barring another fluke injury? Is Drew more prone to fluke injuries than other players? (That's not a rhetorical question.)

Trot Nixon, by the way, played in 286 games over the last three seasons, compared to Drew's 363. So he may have lowered the bar for RFs in Boston.
   18. RB in NYC (Now Semi-Retired from BBTF) Posted: November 17, 2006 at 07:48 PM (#2240550)
Interestingly, Drew's most similar player is Trot Nixon, who he is replacing. Where does Drew play? A lot of that has to do with who goes and who stays, I guess. I've heard talk that Drew thinks CF would keep him healthier, but I'm not sure I buy that (moving a guy to CF at age 31 is going to make him healthy?) even knowing the reasons behind it and if Crisp proved nothing else it is that moving from a corner outfield position to CF is no walk in the park.
   19. Nasty Nate Posted: November 17, 2006 at 07:49 PM (#2240551)
I know you used quote marks and all, but would that be the same J.D. Drew who's averaged 118 games played per sesaon the last six years?


well Frank's averaged only 94 games over those same 6 years and is 7 years older, so I think he's saying that recent vintage Thomas is one of the few players that makes Drew look durable.
   20. Nasty Nate Posted: November 17, 2006 at 07:52 PM (#2240556)
i dont know much about Drew's early career. Were his low game totals from 1999-2001 the result of platoons and lack of a starting job or was it due to injuries and scrotal deficiency?
   21. Kyle S Posted: November 17, 2006 at 07:54 PM (#2240557)
i'm a bit surprised he isn't getting more guaranteed money than he gave up (albeit in fewer years), and will wait till the ink is dry on this one before commenting further.
   22. AROM Posted: November 17, 2006 at 07:57 PM (#2240561)
This pisses me off. Angels need to step in here and offer 3-4 years, yes, even at the same amount.

He's a better player than Soriano. Period. Don't even think about Soriano until you've exhausted every chance to sign Drew.
   23. AROM Posted: November 17, 2006 at 08:02 PM (#2240564)
San Francisco is believed to have made three-year, $30 million offers to center fielders Juan Pierre and Gary Matthews Jr. with the idea that whoever says yes first gets the deal.

Wow.
   24. Pleasant Nate (Upgraded from 'Nate') Posted: November 17, 2006 at 08:06 PM (#2240566)
San Francisco is believed to have made three-year, $30 million offers to center fielders Juan Pierre and Gary Matthews Jr. with the idea that whoever says yes first gets the deal.


Whoever Juan Pierre's agent is should be fired for not accepting that one on the spot. Which means, it probably isn't true.
   25. BTF's left-wing cheering section (formerly_dp) Posted: November 17, 2006 at 08:25 PM (#2240582)
I know you used quote marks and all, but would that be the same J.D. Drew who's averaged 118 games played per sesaon the last six years?

That's my point- $3 M a year doesn't seem like much to gamble if you're already willing to take a chance on Thomas. Thomas hobbles around the basepaths. Drew has looked fine for large portions of the last few years. I could see teams holding off for fear of Drew being brittle, but the Jays are ready to drop $12 M on Thomas, so they don't have that excuse.
   26. Dr. Vaux Posted: November 17, 2006 at 08:37 PM (#2240596)
The A's probably would have paid that for Drew if they thought they could have, too. So would the Tigers, instead of the Sheffield trade. Certainly, if the market has 'blow'd up' to the extent that people think it has, that is a pretty light deal, not in terms of yearly value, but in terms of the commitment length.

Could it be that the market change is going to be for shorter, larger contracts, as teams realize "hey, we've got the money to spend as long as the players are worth it, we've just got to avoid the albatross contracts," and players realize "if I get a ####-load of money now, I'll worry about my next contract later"?
   27. Jonny German Posted: November 17, 2006 at 08:39 PM (#2240598)
I'd pay $3 M more/yr to have the "security" of Drew's health vs. Thomas's

I know you're eager to slag your supposed second-favourite team and all but

a) This report has Drew making $6M more/yr than Thomas, not $3M.

b) It sounds very unlikely. Why would Drew settle for just 2 guaranteed years in this market?
   28. base ball chick Posted: November 17, 2006 at 08:42 PM (#2240603)
Nate Posted: November 17, 2006 at 01:41 PM (#2240545)

I don't know what it's going to be, but a trade with the Astros seems like a decent bet at some point this off-season. They've got relievers we could use, they hate Ensberg, and we have Lowell/Coco/Wily Mo which could all help them.


- well you right about the lot of relievers
and you right bout them hating ensberg - don't ask me why - maybe it's because he refuses to swing at pitches out of the strike zone

wily mo used to be with the reds so we seen him plenty and he fields just about as good as adam dunn and he Ks a LOT which makes you a Bad Person far as phil concerned so forget him

we already got coco - his name is willy taveras and he is younger and cheaper

so yall would have to throw in someone with lowell. because we would be dumb enuf to trade ensberg for lowell in the first place. unless we sign aubrey huff who is a far better player. if you believe the local media
   29. Kyle S Posted: November 17, 2006 at 08:46 PM (#2240606)
how does willy taveras strike out as much as he does despite having zero power? he really sucks at hitting.
   30. 1k5v3L Posted: November 17, 2006 at 08:54 PM (#2240609)
Has this rumor ($30m/2 years) been reported anywhere else?

Racy Tringostar has a reputation for spreading random sh1te rumors all over his writing.

I personally have a really hard time believing Drew would agree to sign for only 2 years.
   31. BTF's left-wing cheering section (formerly_dp) Posted: November 17, 2006 at 09:01 PM (#2240614)
I know you're eager to slag your supposed second-favourite team

What's up with the "supposed"?

No interest in slagging the Jays, just JP's recent trend of buying high. Last season, Thomas went for a pittance and JP developed some weird fixation on Hillendbrand. Piazza went cheap as hell too. I don't understand what goes through his head. Last year, he paid a substantial amount of cash to 3B/DH- some of it to pay for Koskie to play pretty well for the Brewers, some to Hillenbrand to flop back and forth from worthless to MVP-level while being the d!ckhead everyone knew he was, some to Hinske to sit on the bench, and then to Glaus, who held up very well and was worth his contract. Now the Jays are ready to commit to Thomas despite the fact that they have a good deal invested in Glaus, who has some injury problems that could force him to DH if they pop up again. They have Lind, who looks ready but is challenged defensively.

I've seen the Thomas deal at $23 M/2. Drew at $30 M/2 is $3.5 M a year more. I think the health risk, the fact that the contracts are the same length, and the defensive upgrade all make Drew worth the extra money. Again, this isn't a knock on Thomas, but can you really tell me you expect him to play 250 games over the length of the deal?
   32. spycake Posted: November 17, 2006 at 09:25 PM (#2240636)
google boy--

Dan's reporting in T.O. that Thomas to the Jays is official for 2/18. ($8 million for 2007, $10 mil option for 2008)
   33. Jonny German Posted: November 17, 2006 at 09:26 PM (#2240638)
What's up with the "supposed"?

I have this weird notion that when someone calls themself a fan of a team they occasionally allow themselves some positive thoughts towards said team. I can see, sort of, how a person might put up with a team they despise for geographic reasons, but as far as I know that doesn't apply to you either.

Again, this isn't a knock on Thomas, but can you really tell me you expect him to play 250 games over the length of the deal?

I'm not disputing whether or not this is questionable, risky move. I'm disputing your version of the facts. Fact is, Thomas' signing has been confirmed at 2 years, $18M. Conversely, Drew's contract with the Red Sox is simply a rumour at this point, and neither strong nor likely as rumours go.

Yes, it is a risky move, and without the context of what other moves the Jays make this offseason it appears questionable. I'd rather wait and see what happens next then to declare the sky is falling based on one move. There is absolutely no chance it will remain the only move. We don't even know what the budget is, fer cryin' out loud.
   34. rr Posted: November 17, 2006 at 09:28 PM (#2240641)
I personally have a really hard time believing Drew would agree to sign for only 2 years

Yeah, I would think he'd be looking for 3. He walked away from 3/33 left on his LA deal, IIRC. I think he can get 3, too. The Cubs and the Padres are two teams that come to mind that would seem to be in a psoition where they would be willing to give Drew a pretty big contract.
   35. akrasian Posted: November 17, 2006 at 09:28 PM (#2240642)
I have a hard time believing that a Boras client would sign this quickly for only two years.
   36. spycake Posted: November 17, 2006 at 09:32 PM (#2240646)
I misread the Frank Thomas signing. 2/18 with a $10 mil option for 2009.

In any case, Thomas is costing $6m/yr less than the latest Drew rumor.
   37. spycake Posted: November 17, 2006 at 09:39 PM (#2240653)
Then again, for Drew to almost get in 2 years what LA was going to pay him over 3 seems pretty good. Plus, if he really disliked LA and wants to go to a contender, this might be his best bet.
   38. BTF's left-wing cheering section (formerly_dp) Posted: November 17, 2006 at 09:46 PM (#2240661)
I have this weird notion that when someone calls themself a fan of a team they occasionally allow themselves some positive thoughts towards said team.

I had a lot of hope when JP came to town, but I don't buy what he's selling anymore. He doesn't tolerate dissent about his moves- see his comments about BBox a couple of years back- despite the fact that he makes more than his share of bad/confusing ones. The blind faith he asked for hasn't been justified by his performance so far. The Ash regime left him with a lot of talent, and he squandered a good deal of it.

I can see, sort of, how a person might put up with a team they despise for geographic reasons, but as far as I know that doesn't apply to you either.

I grew up upstate, near Syracuse. There was a lot of coverage about the Jays b/c of the Chiefs, and they were the first team I rooted for (we used to get Jays games instead of Yankee games through Fox). Living in NYC now, I can't stand the Yankees and keep waiting for the Jays to depose them. That's what frustrates me about JP- a lot broke right for them last year, a lot broke wrong, the Red Sox and Yanks were vulnerable for good portions of the season, but the Jays for a variety of reasons sucked when it counted. A lot was beyond their control- I certainly didn't think Towers would implode, and Rios getting that debilitating infection was as freaky in injury as you can get, Adams total collapse was unexpected- but then, Burnett going down was predictable, Hillenbrand sucking (and sucking hard- worthless when he's slumping) was predictable. JP seems to make messes he then has to spend time getting out of- see Batista, Koskie, Hinske- rather than spend time moving the team forward.

Dan's reporting in T.O. that Thomas to the Jays is official for 2/18. ($8 million for 2007, $10 mil option for 2008)

The option changes things a good deal. My conern was locking in a guy at DH who might not be able to walk by the second year of the contract, and being on the hook for $11 M to a worthless player. A one-year deal can only screw you up for a year.

BTW, you realize we've hijacked a Red Sox thread with Jays talk. That never happens...
   39. this space for rent Posted: November 17, 2006 at 09:50 PM (#2240665)
So would the Tigers, instead of the Sheffield trade.

Yeah, this makes that trade look lousy. I'd rather have Drew for 2/$30 than Sheffield for 3/$41 even before considering the prospects that the Tigers parted with for the latter.
   40. rr Posted: November 17, 2006 at 09:52 PM (#2240666)
Yeah, this makes that trade look lousy.

Well, that assumes Drew would be interested in playing in Detroit.
   41. Rodder Posted: November 17, 2006 at 10:51 PM (#2240726)
Well, that assumes Drew would be interested in playing in Detroit.

Drew never appears interested in playing anywhere.
   42. villageidiom Posted: November 17, 2006 at 11:12 PM (#2240749)
BTW, you realize we've hijacked a Red Sox thread with Jays talk. That never happens...

First the Jays hijack second place from the Sox, now this.
   43. nycfan Posted: November 17, 2006 at 11:25 PM (#2240762)
Anyone know why it's JD? His name is David Jonathan Drew acording to b-ref. I don't think i've ever seen anyone flip their middle and first name when going by the initials of the two. There must be some kind of story behind it
   44. baudib Posted: November 17, 2006 at 11:30 PM (#2240767)
Boston will hate J.D. Drew and miss Manny Ramirez terribly.
   45. baudib Posted: November 17, 2006 at 11:43 PM (#2240778)
Drew will play well. But when he hits .310 with 19 homers in 420 at-bats for the Red Sox and Manny drives in 145 for the 2007 World Champion Mets, there'll be hell to pay.
   46. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: November 17, 2006 at 11:49 PM (#2240781)
This would be an excellent contract. It seems too good to be true, in fact.
   47. nycfan Posted: November 17, 2006 at 11:56 PM (#2240785)
Drew has played 145 and 146 games 2 of the last three years


And in the other one he only played 72. And in the 5 before 2004 he played under 110 3 times and developed a reputation as being injury-prone. You can't ignore all the times he has been injured just because he hasn't in 2 of the last 3 years.
   48. Dr. Vaux Posted: November 17, 2006 at 11:57 PM (#2240786)
Yeah, well D.J. Drew sounds like a rapper or something. Did not Thoreau switch his first two names, or was that made up for the play?
   49. Boots Day Posted: November 18, 2006 at 12:21 AM (#2240799)
Maybe it's short for WWJD.
   50. Sparkles Peterson Posted: November 18, 2006 at 03:45 AM (#2240880)
And Drew will play much better defense, run the bases a whole lot better, be 3 years younger and generally play baseball like he gives a ####.


Yes he will, but he won't appear to give a ####, so the Boston media is going to eat him alive and portray him as Manny Ramirez minus a bunch of RBIs. It's a shame, but the only place Drew has found where people don't really care whether or not he does a Rex Hudler impression hasn't been willing to pay him what markets where he'll never fit in are.
   51. Fly should without a doubt be number !!!!! Posted: November 18, 2006 at 04:06 AM (#2240888)
</i>Anyone know why it's JD? His name is David Jonathan Drew acording to b-ref. I don't think i've ever seen anyone flip their middle and first name when going by the initials of the two. There must be some kind of story behind it</i>

I know a guy named Christopher Jeffery Davidson who goes by JD, because he used to go by Jeff. I'd imagine a similar thing happened to Drew.
   52. Darren Posted: November 18, 2006 at 04:26 AM (#2240895)
Yes he will, but he won't appear to give a ####, so the Boston media is going to eat him alive and portray him as Manny Ramirez minus a bunch of RBIs. It's a shame, but the only place Drew has found where people don't really care whether or not he does a Rex Hudler impression hasn't been willing to pay him what markets where he'll never fit in are.

You know, I'm not at all sure how the Boston fans will react to Brocktoon. They generally cheer Manny pretty consistently, even though he's portrayed in the papers as a jerk. Then again, they treated Bellhorn, who hustled pretty well, like crap. I think a lot of it had to do with strikeouts and Bellhorn not looking like ballplayer. Maybe it was a the double-flap helmet.

Brocktoon doesn't strike out that much and he looks like a ballplayer. Maybe he'll do alright with the fans. If not, I can always keep him in a giant jar in my basement.
   53. Cowboy Popup Posted: November 18, 2006 at 04:35 AM (#2240900)
"Not if he plays well, they won't. If he plays well, the fans will love him and will quickly forget about Manny. Look at how quickly they forgot about Nomar."

Yeah, the Sox faithful will forget the best Red Sox hitter since Williams, sure.

"And Drew will play much better defense, run the bases a whole lot better, be 3 years younger and generally play baseball like he gives a ####. The fans will welcome that, even if he doesn't hit quite as well as Manny."

Not quite as well as Manny? Drew has matched Manny's average production over his career twice. But the individual drop off at the plate isn't waht makes me giddy, Drew may make that value up on defense and on the bases. I'm excited because the most terrifying offensive duo in the game, and one of the scariest in baseball history will be broken up. Dear God I hope they trade Manny. JD Drew isn't going to hit .556 against the Yanks and he's sure as hell not going to protect David Ortiz. This is one of those times where Drew might be the better player on paper, but I really think the Ortiz-Manny duo is worth alot more together then they are seperately. Facing the Sox and not having to watch those two come up every two or three innings will lower my blood pressure, I'll live longer, and it will be awesome.
   54. Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee Posted: November 18, 2006 at 04:47 AM (#2240906)
Drew will play well. But when he hits .310 with 19 homers in 420 at-bats for the Red Sox and Manny drives in 145 for the 2007 World Champion Mets, there'll be hell to pay.

I know there are drawbacks to getting Manny but a middle of the lineup consisting of Beltran/Manny/Delgado/Wright would be amazing.
   55. Darren Posted: November 18, 2006 at 04:48 AM (#2240908)
Cowboy,

I kind of feel the same way about Sheffield. Unfortunately, the Yankees have 40 other good hitters. And if trading Manny makes you live longer, I'm all for it.
   56. PJ Martinez Posted: November 18, 2006 at 05:10 AM (#2240922)
"I think a lot of it had to do with strikeouts and Bellhorn not looking like ballplayer."

I think it had everything to do with the strikeouts-- well, that and the comparison with Pokey, who was so fun to watch in the field and smiled a lot and had a great name and whose batting average wasn't much worse and that's what matters, right?

Anyway, as for Manny vs. Drew: it will never be a one to one comparison, unless the Sox FO stupidly give Manny away, in which case they deserve whatever they get. But the logic of signing Drew and trading Manny is not that they're equal players, it's that some team might give you enough for Manny to more than make up for the drop-off in the two OFs.

Also, it's been wonderful having Manny and Ortiz, but last year we won, what, 87 games? So those two alone are not some magic potion or anything, however much fear Manny might strike in the hearts of Yankee fans.
   57. Raskolnikov Posted: November 18, 2006 at 05:17 AM (#2240928)
Also, it's been wonderful having Manny and Ortiz, but last year we won, what, 87 games? So those two alone are not some magic potion or anything, however much fear Manny might strike in the hearts of Yankee fans.

As I'm sure you follow the Red Sox as avidly as I do, that's crazy to blame 87 wins on Ortiz/Manny. Last year, it was Ortiz/Manny and then do laundry for 7 batters before Ortiz/Manny again. They carried the offense.
   58. Raskolnikov Posted: November 18, 2006 at 05:21 AM (#2240932)
Beltran/Manny/Delgado/Wright

I know. But I still worry about Manny starting a decline.

Any other potent bat would look awesome with Beltran/Delgado/Wright

Let's see:

Beltran/Delgado/Wright/Soriano

Beltran/Delgado/Wright/Lee

Beltran/Delgado/Wright/Dunn

Beltran/Delgado/Wright/Hall

Crawford/Beltran/Delgado/Wright

and you know this is coming in a couple of years,

Martinez/Beltran/Delgado/Wright
   59. Darren Posted: November 18, 2006 at 05:26 AM (#2240933)
I was sure Manny was declining in the 04-05 period. It seemed like he had established a new level, a notch below his previous production. Then 06 boosted him right back up. Was that his death rattle? A fluke? A little of both?

I don't know, but I'd still deal him for value.
   60. Raskolnikov Posted: November 18, 2006 at 05:32 AM (#2240940)
It wouldn't be right to separate Ortiz and Manny anyway. It'd be too strange.

Darren, I predict your infatuation with JD Drew will haunt you if it leads to Manny leaving town.
   61. Darren Posted: November 18, 2006 at 05:38 AM (#2240945)
Don't talk about Brocktoon that way.

Also, I've been infatuated with trading Manny for longer than I've been infatuated with Brocktoon.
   62. Raskolnikov Posted: November 18, 2006 at 05:46 AM (#2240950)
Brocktoon doesn't strike out that much and he looks like a ballplayer. Maybe he'll do alright with the fans. If not, I can always keep him in a giant jar in my basement.

Either he puts up ATL numbers in Boston or he gets a couple of keys hits against the Yankees. Otherwise, Boston will rip him apart. Personality-wise, I can't think of a worse match, especially when he may be taking Trot's place.
   63. PJ Martinez Posted: November 18, 2006 at 05:58 AM (#2240962)
"As I'm sure you follow the Red Sox as avidly as I do, that's crazy to blame 87 wins on Ortiz/Manny. Last year, it was Ortiz/Manny and then do laundry for 7 batters before Ortiz/Manny again. They carried the offense."

I didn't by any possible stretch mean to "blame" them-- without them, we'd have been pathetic. My point is, the Sox need to improve in many areas, and if signing Drew and trading Manny for good players means an overall improvement to the team, then the Sox should do it, even if it means breaking up the wonderful mystical tandem of Manny/Ortiz.

By no means should this be a top priority for the Sox, but they shouldn't rule it out either.

Russlan: by "drawbacks" do you mean the players you'd have to give up? The cost in salary? The attitude? As for the salary, I suspect Manny is close to market vlaue at this point (18/2 for the Big-- and very old and very-- Hurt? 15/3 for Alex Gonzalez?). As for the attitude, it never seemed to actually hurt the Sox in any significant way.

But in terms of players, I certainly hope and expect the cost will be substantial.
   64. Darren Posted: November 18, 2006 at 06:03 AM (#2240965)
If anyone wants to throw up, take a look at the latest Rosenthal thread in which he proposes the Sox could get Itzturis and a reliever from the cubs for Manny. Gee, thanks.
   65. Norcan Posted: November 18, 2006 at 06:05 AM (#2240967)
I like this idea of going only two years. It's certainly not a given that he's going to assimilate to Boston so easily. If it turns out he's not comfortable in that atmosphere, both sides will have a relatively quick separation. But if Drew puts out a 300/380/560 line next season, then the Red Sox could renegotiate for a longer contract. I like the flexibility to try him out the contract gives.
   66. Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee Posted: November 18, 2006 at 06:09 AM (#2240972)
Russlan: by "drawbacks" do you mean the players you'd have to give up? The cost in salary? The attitude? As for the salary, I suspect Manny is close to market vlaue at this point (18/2 for the Big-- and very old and very-- Hurt? 15/3 for Alex Gonzalez?). As for the attitude, it never seemed to actually hurt the Sox in any significant way.

I don't care much about the attitude. The Mets have one of the best clubhouses in baseball and a manager who is known for his ability to relate to players. Playing near his home and with a bunch of Latin players like Beltran, Delgado, Pedro et. al would keep Manny happy and Manny's always been a great hitter when he's happy. Hell, he's always been productive, even when not happy. His contract isn't prohibitive either considering the current market.

That said, Manny is a bad defensive player and a bad baserunner and that's takes a considerable chunk out of his value, as I'm sure you know. In addition, the Mets would probably have to do something about rightfield because Green is a horrible outfielder as well and we don't want Beltran to have to catch every flyball. Also, I don't think Boston is going to be reasonable in its demands.

Those are Manny's drawbacks.
   67. Darren Posted: November 18, 2006 at 06:13 AM (#2240977)
When you say Boston won't be reasonable, what do you think would be a reasonable return? Heilman and a B prospect? Milledge?
   68. Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee Posted: November 18, 2006 at 06:33 AM (#2240986)
Two years ago, when Manny's contract was much more of a burden than it is now, Epstein insisted on Heilman and Milledge for Manny. He'd expect probably at least that much for him and I don't think that's reasonable. For all the talk about there being an increased market for Manny, I'm not sure how many teams who could afford his contract, give up quality for him, and for whom Manny would be willing to play.

I'd do Heilman and a B prospect for Manny. I wouldn't do Milledge for Manny.
   69. Darren Posted: November 18, 2006 at 06:37 AM (#2240987)
I think you're right then that the Red Sox would want more than you're willing to give.

For all the talk about there being an increased market for Manny, I'm not sure how many teams who could afford his contract, give up quality for him, and for whom Manny would be willing to play.

Yeah, it's a tough trifecta. I would think that any team that is willing to give Lee 4/60 or whatever would be willing to give Manny 2/36. Don't know if Manny would want to play in any of those places. Probably depend on the day that you asked him.
   70. Ozzie's gay friend Posted: November 18, 2006 at 07:02 AM (#2240997)
This rumor is totally bogus.

No way Drew goes for $30M.

I think he'll disapoint in Boston, but for for 2 years I'd sign him.

Could the mets get Soriano AND Manny?

Reyes SS
Beltran CF
Manny LF
Delgado 1B
Soriano 2b/RF
Wright 3B
LoDuca C
Endy RF/Valentin-Esteban German- Loretta 2B
Zito P
   71. Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee Posted: November 18, 2006 at 07:08 AM (#2241002)
The Mets aren't going to be able to sign Soriano and Zito and trade for Manny. That ain't going to happen.
   72. Raskolnikov Posted: November 18, 2006 at 07:08 AM (#2241003)
Could the mets get Soriano AND Manny?

Reyes SS
Beltran CF
Manny LF
Delgado 1B
Soriano 2b/RF
Wright 3B
LoDuca C
Endy RF/Valentin-Esteban German- Loretta 2B
Zito P


Beat you to the punch a couple of weeks ago. I added Adam Dunn into the lineup, just for kicks.
The defense would be too atrocious. Russlan countered with a lineup that included the likes of Jose Guillen and David Dellucci. I blacked out after than...
   73. Raskolnikov Posted: November 18, 2006 at 07:11 AM (#2241004)
I'd do Heilman and a B prospect for Manny.

Only problem is that we don't have any B prospects, none that are above A+ ball anyway. Otherwise, I'd drive Heilman up to Boston.
   74. Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee Posted: November 18, 2006 at 07:16 AM (#2241006)
Rask, could you give me a Sickel's like top-10 or 20 list of Met prospects?
   75. Raskolnikov Posted: November 18, 2006 at 07:51 AM (#2241022)
Russlan, here's my Sickels report:

F-Mart: Once in a generation prospect. Will be better than Reyes or Wright.
Carp: Remote chance of ever making it to the majors. Just kidding. The doubters will face their day.
Pelfrey: Best pitching prospect since Gooden. Yes, better than Kazmir and Isringhausen.
Humber: Awesome potential, but need to see more. Classic TINSTAAPP.
Milledge: A level prospect, seems to rub some veterans the wrong way.
Ollie: Awesome potential. Coin-flip how he'll turn out. No one knows.
Guerra: Impressive debut. So young that it's tough to project. Would like to see him increase his velocity as he grows older. I'd be patient with this one.
Hietpas: I would have tried to convert him to pitching by now.
Soler: Give him another shot. 2 starts should not end a career.
Lambin: Free Chase Lambin.
A-Hern: Glove will allow him to have a long major league career.
Gomez: So young. Seems to learn quickly at each level. Fast and great defensive reputation. How much he develops his hitting will determine whether he becomes a star or a role player.
Emmanuel Garcia: Only middle infielder prospect in the system. Needs to hit for more power before I make any emotional commitment.
Hector Pellot: B*)@#). I thought he was supposed to be good.
Corey Ragsdale: I've been following him for so long, I just want to see him get 2 major league at bats.
Flores: Starting catcher, NYM: 2009-2019.
Niese: Interesting stuff. Project for now. I can see him having a stop-breakthrough-stop-breakthrough type progression through the minors.
Nick Evans: Most overrated player in our system.
Heath Bell: No such thing as a AAAA pitcher.
Shawn Bowman: If only he could make contact.
Mike Devaney: Will start in the majors someday. People will keep expecting him to fail at each level, and he'll keep proving them wrong.
Kevin Mulvey: Trade bait as soon as he's eligible.
Yulieski Gourriel: Future Met.
Francisco Pena: I expect him to be a star. And I haven't even read a single report on his playing ability.
Sam M: Any discussion concerning David Wright turns him irrational. Who the hell wouldn't take JSantana? Veteran poster still in his prime.
Russlan: Consistently strong poster. Uses intelligent reasoning and solid evidence to back his conclusions. Prejudiced against Bell for some reason. Strange fetish for retread 800 OPS corner OFers. Will be the Mets Primate who will take Delgado's inevitable decline the hardest.

As always, my caveat is that this was done on a Friday night in 5 minutes. I will absolutely deny ever writing any of this if it turns out to be wrong.
   76. Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee Posted: November 18, 2006 at 08:01 AM (#2241025)
Russlan: Consistently strong poster. Uses intelligent reasoning and solid evidence to back his conclusions. Prejudiced against Bell for some reason. Strange fetish for retread 800 OPS corner OFers. Will be the Mets Primate who will take Delgado's inevitable decline the hardest.

For some reason, I found this hysterical. I will take Delgado's eventual decline pretty hard and wonder how you know this. I hope it's a few years from now.

Thanks for doing that Rask. The whole thing was funny and informative.
   77. Шĥy Posted: November 18, 2006 at 08:12 AM (#2241030)
Martinez/Beltran/Delgado/Wright

I'd think at that point, it would look more like Wright/Beltran/Cabrera/Martinez
   78. Darnell McDonald had a farm Posted: November 18, 2006 at 09:19 AM (#2241045)
"Interestingly, Drew's most similar player is Trot Nixon"

AAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGG

Take it easy, deep breaths, don't lash out

http://www.baseball-reference.com/d/drewj.01.shtml

Similar Batters through Age 30

Compare Stats
Jim Edmonds (963)
Larry Doby (940) *
Kevin Mitchell (934)
Bobby Higginson (932)
Kirk Gibson (931)
Bill Nicholson (931)
Charlie Keller (930)
David Justice (925)
Richard Hidalgo (924)
Geoff Jenkins (921)
   79. John DiFool2 Posted: November 18, 2006 at 06:46 PM (#2241150)
Crazy thought: what if Ortiz can play a passable 1B? He probably would hurt the D
less at first than Manny would in left, correct? Then Youks goes to 3rd, Lowell is
traded, Mo in left. Defense overall is probably not better tho. Pena looked good
in CF during his stint last year-I think he has problems reading curving line drives,
something which you mostly avoid in center.
   80. Mister High Standards Posted: November 18, 2006 at 07:55 PM (#2241183)
I'm so glad it looks like nothing has come of this JD Drew stuff. I think he is an unlikable guy, and as much as I mentally want to dislike Manny I can't seem to for longer than 2 weeks.

I want Manny and Ortiz together until the end of the 08 season AT LEAST. I want to be old and gray and thinking of those two terrorizing pitchers together for half a dozen years.

I think I'll watch some of my 04 DVD's after the football games today.

BTW: People forget how insane of a hitter Manny is.

In his 6 years with the Sox...

He 7th all time among RedSox in RCAA. Will most likly be 5th by the end of next season.

The guy is just the most consistant hitter I've ever seen.
   81. AROM Posted: November 18, 2006 at 07:58 PM (#2241185)
Well, that assumes Drew would be interested in playing in Detroit.

That would be tough sell. Drew probably doesn't want to go for losing team, he'd prefer to play for someone who can get to the world series.

Yeah, well D.J. Drew sounds like a rapper or something.

If he was a rapper the best thing would be to reverse his last name.

D.J. Werd to your mother.

Crazy thought: what if Ortiz can play a passable 1B? He probably would hurt the D
less at first than Manny would in left, correct?


Don't you think that question has come up once or twice in the Red Sox front office? They may be right or wrong, but seem to believe that the best alignment is Manny in left, Ortiz at DH.

It could have more to do with keeping Ortiz healthy than his glove, but a switch would have been easy last year - just play Youkilis in left, as he often did after Manny got hurt.
   82. bibigon Posted: November 18, 2006 at 08:03 PM (#2241186)
Crazy thought: what if Ortiz can play a passable 1B?


The concern isn't over defense, but rather over Ortiz's health. There is a belief, right or wrong, that his knees might not be able to take it.
   83. Vin Middle Posted: November 18, 2006 at 08:32 PM (#2241194)
MHS, you speak the truth. We can measure this every way you want, but Manny in '07 will be infinitely more entertaining to watch than automaton Drew. Drew would be a TRAIN WRECK in Boston. I know that BSG is not much loved around these parts, but he speaks for the majority of Sawks fans. And he has already started ripping Drew. The knives are out.
   84. PJ Martinez Posted: November 18, 2006 at 08:36 PM (#2241195)
I really don't care what a bunch of loud-mouthed idiots think about a particular player, and I imagine there are some powerful people in the front office who don't care either. Those people will root for the Sox and go to the games etc anyway, and if they don't, good riddance.

I love Manny, and would be very happy to root for him in Boston for another couple of years. Simple fact is this roster is not well constructed so far as the OF is concerned. Coco Crisp may or not be able to play CF, and Manny and Wily Mo Pena may or may not be able to play anywhere. Ortiz apparently cannot play the field more than a few times a year. Something may need to give for the Sox to get back to the promised land.
   85. philly Posted: November 19, 2006 at 11:26 PM (#2241739)
In light of the Soriano deal, I am *so* glad this deal worked out with Drew.

This is still on right?
   86. Sean in Sydney Posted: November 19, 2006 at 11:56 PM (#2241761)
This is still on right?
It was reported on Smash and I've heard nothing since. THat makes me think it was never really confirmed with the Sox FO.
   87. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: November 20, 2006 at 02:20 AM (#2241879)
The decision here is easy. Sign Drew. Keep Coco. Keep Manny. With those 4, you need the 4 OF's anyway.

Leave Wily Mo in center, JD in right, and Manny in left. Bring in Coco as much as possible though for pinch running/defensive sub situations/Rotate him in the lineup as much as you can. Keeps people fresh.
   88. Toby Posted: November 20, 2006 at 02:20 AM (#2241880)
the rumor said only a deal was "expected".
   89. 1k5v3L Posted: November 20, 2006 at 02:44 AM (#2241904)
In light of the Soriano deal, I am *so* glad this deal worked out with Drew.

This is still on right?



See post 30
   90. Darren Posted: November 20, 2006 at 04:25 AM (#2241960)
Toby,

What do you think about putting stuff like this in a newsblog item rather than a Sox Therapy post? It seems kind of out of place here.

As for the expected deal, I'd note that Drew was also expected to decline his option to become a FA.
   91. Kyle S Posted: November 20, 2006 at 04:27 AM (#2241964)
i'd say there remains 0.00001% chance this rumor is true. Maybe boras decided to leave 40m plus on the table... but i don't see it.
   92. Toby Posted: November 20, 2006 at 05:53 PM (#2242202)
Darren,

I put it here because what I wanted to discuss was the Sox outfield situation, and this news item was just a way to do that. Making it a news item would be fine too, but would prompt a different sort of discussion.
   93. Mattrix41 Posted: November 20, 2006 at 09:15 PM (#2242400)
I'm with IronChef. Do not trade Manny - he is still a top three AL hitter. Drew cannot replace Manny's bat, but he can greatly improve the middle of the order (Ortiz/Manny/Drew) production. If the Sox sign D-Mat and Drew, they are in good shape for a 2007 Pennant run. The other holes can be filled.
   94. WalkOffIBB Posted: November 20, 2006 at 09:30 PM (#2242423)
Well, that assumes Drew would be interested in playing in Detroit.

That would be tough sell. Drew probably doesn't want to go for losing team, he'd prefer to play for someone who can get to the world series.

I'm sorry, did the 2006 season and playoffs not occur?
   95. Josh Posted: November 20, 2006 at 09:36 PM (#2242429)
This is Sox Therapy - we certainly hope the 2006 season and playoffs did not occur.
   96. The Bones McCoy of THT Posted: November 20, 2006 at 10:38 PM (#2242495)
Well, that assumes Drew would be interested in playing in Detroit


Heck, he's a Boras client. Detroit flashes enough jack and Drew will *love* playing in Motown alongside Pudge, Magglio, and Mr. Sunshine who forgets to wash after wiping his bum.

Best Regards

John
   97. Darren Posted: November 21, 2006 at 03:34 AM (#2242696)
Okay Toby, sounds good to me. Maybe it was the title that threw me. It seemed like a news item and drew a lot of attention from the non-ST riffraff. Maybe titling it something like "Where will Drew fit?" I dunno, it's up to you, of course.

And hey Red Sox, hurry up and make this deal before the price goes through the damn roof!
   98. Margo Adams FC Posted: November 21, 2006 at 03:44 AM (#2242706)
I fear the Pierre signing kills the Drew at 15x2 fantasy as surely as if Boras had backed up his SUV over it. Oh well, it was nice while it lasted.
   99. Margo Adams FC Posted: November 21, 2006 at 03:50 AM (#2242709)
I fear that after the Pierre signing Boras will want $17 million a year for Drew with an annual opt out option...
   100. Phil Coorey is a T-Shirt Salesman Posted: November 21, 2006 at 04:28 AM (#2242730)
STUPID FRIGGING DODGERS
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
Harry Balsagne, anti-Centaur hate crime division
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Page rendered in 0.9241 seconds
41 querie(s) executed