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 4 pages  1 2 3 >  Last ›
   1. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: August 24, 2012 at 07:29 PM (#4217205)
The numbers above are really carried by the Crawford contract, as I said. I'm following the insanity at the regularly updated MLBTR post, and there's a report there that the deal might just be Gonzalez and Beckett to LA, sans Crawford. This is much, much less appealing trade, especially given that the Dodgers have made a waiver claim on Beckett. Since the Sox already can just give away Beckett to the Dodgers, they should be able to expect a significant return for Gonzalez. This are the overpayment numbers for just Beckett and Gonzalez:

2013: $6M (all Beckett)
2014: $10M ($8M Beckett)
2015: $3M
2016: $5M
2017: $7M
2018: $10M

Outside of the benefits of dumping Beckett, that's a small $$/win profit weighted heavily to the not particularly near future. I'm not a fan of dumping Gonzalez. Gonzalez and Crawford have to be a package deal, or the Dodgers need to be giving us a bunch of prospects.
   2. Pleasant Nate (Upgraded from 'Nate') Posted: August 24, 2012 at 07:50 PM (#4217254)
So, who do the Sox go after with all this cash?
   3. Avoid running at all times.-S. Paige Posted: August 24, 2012 at 07:53 PM (#4217266)
Nick Swisher wants Jayson Werth money.

By the way, this whole thing is insane.
   4. The Mighty Quintana Posted: August 24, 2012 at 07:56 PM (#4217277)
My vote is to spend all the money on the construction of Brazilian, Dutch, and Australian baseball academies. Think boldly!
   5. The Anthony Kennedy of BBTF (Scott) Posted: August 24, 2012 at 07:58 PM (#4217280)
Yeah, letting A-Gon go without getting rid of Crawford makes it not worthwhile. But with Beckett/Crawford going with A-Gon, then it's mighty intriguing.
   6. Mattbert Posted: August 24, 2012 at 08:15 PM (#4217311)
Lots of tweetery that the deal is going to be something along these lines:

BOS gives up Gonzalez, Beckett, Crawford, and Punto (plus some nontrivial cash considerations, presumably)
LAD gives up Loney and four prospects (Rubby de la Rosa, Ivan De Jesus, Jerry Sands, and Allen Webster)

That would definitely qualify as the long-awaited Smile and Magnum (Smegma?) trade.
   7. PJ Martinez Posted: August 24, 2012 at 08:25 PM (#4217320)
"With numbers like that, the Red Sox would have to be pretty incompetent not to be able to re-distribute this money to new players at a benefit to the team."

What was the last bit of evidence that the current front office is not "pretty incompetent"?

Also, is the phrase "unveil his Magnum" as gross as it sounds?
   8. Mattbert Posted: August 24, 2012 at 08:25 PM (#4217321)
Outside of the benefits of dumping Beckett, that's a small $$/win profit weighted heavily to the not particularly near future. I'm not a fan of dumping Gonzalez. Gonzalez and Crawford have to be a package deal, or the Dodgers need to be giving us a bunch of prospects.

It sounds like the latter is what's going to happen. I don't like trading Gonzo either, but that's the price of getting shot of the Beckett and Crawford contracts.
   9. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: August 24, 2012 at 08:37 PM (#4217341)
Also, is the phrase "unveil his Magnum" as gross as it sounds?
Oh, that does sound icky. It isn't, though.

Magnum. (It's an old ST bit, in reference to the impossible mega-trades that Theo Epstein would meticulously construct, but never quite complete every offseason and trade deadline. They seemed like classic lost works of art, never quite ready for the public. I called it Smile, Darren preferred Magnum.)
"With numbers like that, the Red Sox would have to be pretty incompetent not to be able to re-distribute this money to new players at a benefit to the team."

What was the last bit of evidence that the current front office is not "pretty incompetent"?
Well, they were going to need to be highly competent to produce a winning team in 2013-2014 anyway. This has made that job easier. Maybe they still screw it up, but if you're starting with the presumption of incompetence, then your baseline for 2013-2014 should be two more years out of the playoffs regardless.
   10. Kurt Posted: August 24, 2012 at 08:42 PM (#4217344)
Crawford’s contract is a naked singularity toward which all legal tender is inexorably sucked

Oh come on, it's much, *much* too early to be passing judgment on Crawford's contract. /crispix
   11. PJ Martinez Posted: August 24, 2012 at 08:45 PM (#4217346)
Re: #9, I definitely prefer "Smile," much as I would normally appreciate a "Zoolander" reference. (Man that movie's crazy.)

And I don't actually disagree with any of your thoughts here, except that I don't think it's as simple as laying out the monetary values and calculating some expected return on presumed future investment. Dumping Gonzalez to shed Crawford basically means starting over, which may very well be the way to go, but that's a lot of talent to just drop.

Also, I'm annoyed we'd still have Lackey. Sigh.
   12. Mattbert Posted: August 24, 2012 at 08:49 PM (#4217350)
Also, I'm annoyed we'd still have Lackey. Sigh.

Remember this is Ned Colletti we're dealing with. Don't give up hope yet.
   13. Mattbert Posted: August 24, 2012 at 08:50 PM (#4217352)
If this thing gets pulled off as rumored, "and Nick Punto" might become the next "and Mike Crudale", right?
   14. Pleasant Nate (Upgraded from 'Nate') Posted: August 24, 2012 at 09:05 PM (#4217371)
In true Red Sox fashion, 2 of the 4 Dodger prospects, plus one of ours, plus another we get in the off-season by trading away XYZ, will be used to get Upton in the off-season.

Players that are free agents after 2013, aka, the likely trade crop:

David Wright (prolly resigned)
Brian McCann
Shin-Soo Choo
Corey Hart
Josh Johnson
Matt Garza
Tim Lincecum

And a bunch of guys that are 'meh', old, or some combination thereof.
   15. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: August 24, 2012 at 09:30 PM (#4217389)
My vote is to spend all the money on the construction of Brazilian, Dutch, and Australian baseball academies.


My vote is to spend it all on Brazilian, Dutch, and Australian hookers.
   16. Dan Posted: August 24, 2012 at 09:37 PM (#4217395)
So I laid down to take a nap around 4:00 and woke up about an hour ago to see this news. Holy ####### ####.

My first instinct is that it's worth dumping Gonzalez in order to get out from under these contracts, but who the hell knows until we see how much money the Sox have to send along with the contracts.
   17. Mattbert Posted: August 24, 2012 at 09:37 PM (#4217397)
Or they spend it all on Brazilian and Dutch soccer players for Liverpool.
   18. Dan Posted: August 24, 2012 at 09:38 PM (#4217398)
I think Nate missed two of the more likely Red Sox FA targets for the offseason in post 14: Josh Hamilton and Nick Swisher. Swisher in particular is a really good fit, either replacing Gonzalez at 1B or Crawford in LF. Or doing some split between those spots around other fill-ins.
   19. Textbook Editor Posted: August 24, 2012 at 09:40 PM (#4217401)
I... I'm speechless. Would this be the biggest trade for the Red Sox since they traded Ruth?

One side note in all of this: getting rid of these contracts ups--I think/hope--the possibility they re-sign/offer a whole lotta $ to Ellsbury, which is a move I generally am OK with.

Dare they play Ortiz at 1B next year?
   20. Textbook Editor Posted: August 24, 2012 at 09:43 PM (#4217403)
I think Nate missed two of the more likely Red Sox FA targets for the offseason in post 14: Josh Hamilton and Nick Swisher. Swisher in particular is a really good fit, either replacing Gonzalez at 1B or Crawford in LF. Or doing some split between those spots around other fill-ins.


I'm leery of both of those guys. Hamilton is a big risk (IMO) with anything more than a 3-4 year deal (which he won't do, presumably); Swisher is...well... Swisher. I'm not a fan.
   21. Pleasant Nate (Upgraded from 'Nate') Posted: August 24, 2012 at 09:48 PM (#4217407)
I think Nate missed two of the more likely Red Sox FA targets for the offseason in post 14: Josh Hamilton and Nick Swisher. Swisher in particular is a really good fit, either replacing Gonzalez at 1B or Crawford in LF. Or doing some split between those spots around other fill-ins.


I was mining the trade market, and noted free agents AFTER 2013, not before it.
   22. Dan Posted: August 24, 2012 at 09:52 PM (#4217412)
Ohhh okay. Sorry then. Misread your post.

Choo would be a really good fit on this team and in Fenway's RF.
   23. Sonic Youk Posted: August 24, 2012 at 09:53 PM (#4217413)
Well, whether this trade is good or bad, they have a ton of money and enough prospects to make some big deals. A few hours ago, this team was set in stone. Now, i have no idea which direction they're going in. They're going to be awful next year, but at least there might be something other than clubhouse drama to pay attention to.
   24. Mattbert Posted: August 24, 2012 at 09:54 PM (#4217414)
I love Swisher and would like to have him on my team, but I'd be leery of anything beyond about 3 years guaranteed. Greinke is another big name who will likely be on the market this winter, but Nate was listing potential 2013 FAs not potential 2012 FAs.

EDIT: I see Nate clarified his own post as I was drafting this one.
   25. Textbook Editor Posted: August 24, 2012 at 10:05 PM (#4217426)

Well, whether this trade is good or bad, they have a ton of money and enough prospects to make some big deals. A few hours ago, this team was set in stone. Now, i have no idea which direction they're going in. They're going to be awful next year, but at least there might be something other than clubhouse drama to pay attention to.


Yeah, things will get pretty wild from here on in if this goes down, that is for sure.
   26. Mattbert Posted: August 24, 2012 at 10:08 PM (#4217430)
I think that's why I like this trade a lot. Without doing something huge like this, there was almost nothing they could do to improve the team besides hope really, really hard that their star players stop playing like dogshit. Now they have options.
   27. Dan Posted: August 24, 2012 at 10:19 PM (#4217437)
The truly crazy thing is that in December 2010 I was absolutely stoked that the Sox acquired both Gonzalez and Crawford, even if Crawford looked like a bit of an overpay. And here we are, not even 20 months later, and it's exciting to think that the Sox might be getting out from under $100M+ commitments to each of them. Even in the first half of last season, it was a joy watching Gonzalez hit, and I had a blast rooting for him in the HRD. And then he just stopped hitting home runs.
   28. Dan Posted: August 24, 2012 at 10:23 PM (#4217443)
Latest reports are that the Red Sox would only be sending ~$10M of the ~$270M owed to these guys. If that's true, then I unequivocally approve of the trade. I really think that the draconian penalties on revenue sharing money for staying over the luxury tax in the new CBA caught the Red Sox FO completely off guard, and this deal basically let's them move past that mistake.
   29. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: August 24, 2012 at 10:31 PM (#4217455)
Without doing something huge like this, there was almost nothing they could do to improve the team besides hope really, really hard that their star players stop playing like dogshit.
Yup. If I thought the Red Sox projected to win 92-95 games next year, I'd feel very differently about this. When I eyeball the numbers, I get much more of an 85-88 figure, and without a lot of wiggle room to improve the club. 2013 was already going to be a bridge year - barring the star players all rebounding back to their 2010 form - so this actually means they can build that bridge to somewhere.

Hopefully its somewhere good.
   30. booond Posted: August 24, 2012 at 10:41 PM (#4217462)
Is there a way to place John Lackey in Beckett's luggage?
   31. Dan Posted: August 24, 2012 at 10:43 PM (#4217463)
It seems hard to believe, but there really is a decent chance that Lackey comes back from TJS as a decent pitcher. It's by no means a given, but I wouldn't be surprised if he's better than Beckett next year, for example. I hate Lackey as much as anyone else does, but I don't think we need to jettison him before seeing if he's able to rebound with a healthy elbow.
   32. Pleasant Nate (Upgraded from 'Nate') Posted: August 24, 2012 at 10:44 PM (#4217464)
Is there a way to place John Lackey in Beckett's luggage?


Deep fry him first and you won't even have to ask.
   33. Infinite Joost (Voxter) Posted: August 24, 2012 at 10:44 PM (#4217467)
I've been thinking about the Gonzalez part of this trade, and I just don't think it bothers me that much. He's 30 and the contract lasts until he's 37. It's possible the he retains his ability to hit like Ortiz did, but the odds are hard against it. I don't like 9 figure contracts to 1Bmen as a rule, so maybe that's why I'm not feeling like I'm that sad about his departure.
   34. Darren Posted: August 24, 2012 at 10:48 PM (#4217471)
I called it Smile, Darren preferred Magnum.)


This tells you all you need to know about our respective intellectual levels.

@33--
That's my point. Even if you like Gonzalez, would you be happy if the Red Sox had signed him for 6/130 coming off these past two years?

I wouldn't have punted on Beckett in isolation (and can see the side of the argument that Gonzalez would be worth his deal), but getting rid of Crawford too and possibly getting talent back makes this a good deal.

   35. Infinite Joost (Voxter) Posted: August 24, 2012 at 10:54 PM (#4217481)
Also, this gives us the opportunity to be as self-obsessed & arrogant as Yankees fans when it comes to smaller market stars. I can't wait to see Andrew McCutchen in a Bosox uniform.
   36. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: August 24, 2012 at 10:57 PM (#4217483)
I wouldn't have punted on Beckett in isolation (and can see the side of the argument that Gonzalez would be worth his deal), but getting rid of Crawford too and possibly getting talent back makes this a good deal.
This is pointless quibbling when we agree on all the important points, but what is the internet for anyway? Beckett projects as a league average pitcher at $17M per season. The Sox have good SP depth and mid-range SP have been getting very reasonable deals on the market recently. If the deal falls through - which you rightly point out is more than possible - I think at least the Sox can let Beckett go on a free.
   37. Infinite Joost (Voxter) Posted: August 24, 2012 at 10:58 PM (#4217484)
"I called it Smile, Darren preferred Magnum.)


This tells you all you need to know about our respective intellectual levels. "

But if I call it Poetica Comedia, I'm just pretentious. No fair.
   38. Darren Posted: August 24, 2012 at 11:14 PM (#4217496)
MC, Can you share your Marcels for Beckett? His peripherals are pretty good and ZIPS rest of season has him putting up a 3.75 ERA.
   39. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: August 24, 2012 at 11:25 PM (#4217505)
I can't wait to see Andrew McCutchen in a Bosox uniform.


You're probably going to have to wait until 2019.
   40. Dale Sams Posted: August 24, 2012 at 11:36 PM (#4217515)
I want to go on record now before the crowd mania spreads here like it has at OTM and say this is the stupidest thing I have ever seen. The Sox will not make the playoffs in 2013, or 2014 and probably for years and years to come.

We have traded Josh Reddick, Kevin Youkilis, Carl Crawford, Jed Lowrie, Adrian Gonzalez for a couple of relievers and 2 fringe prospects. ####### INSANE
   41. Dan Posted: August 24, 2012 at 11:38 PM (#4217517)
There's something amusing about the fact that they let Valentine field his post-game press conference and everything without any updates on this. He even said he expects Beckett to start tomorrow. What a maroon.
   42. Jose Is The Most Absurd Thing on the Site Posted: August 24, 2012 at 11:46 PM (#4217526)
You guys have talked me down a bit but I'm a lot closer to Dale than anything else. I just don't see this as a good deal for the Sox. Yes, they get rid of Gonzalez, Beckett and Crawford but they still have to replace them and the fact is it is unlikely that they are going to be able to reliably do so at the same or less money. Maybe I'm unreasonably high on all three but I'll be stunned if the Sox can meaningfully improve on those three players for 2013 and beyond.

The fact remains that I have seen nothing from Cherington that gives me confidence that he's going to spend this money right.

And Dan, if you'd slept 10 more minutes maybe they would've fired Valentine.
   43. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: August 24, 2012 at 11:48 PM (#4217528)
He even said he expects Beckett to start tomorrow.

Gotta enhance his value.
   44. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: August 24, 2012 at 11:49 PM (#4217529)
MC, Can you share your Marcels for Beckett? His peripherals are pretty good and ZIPS rest of season has him putting up a 3.75 ERA.
I'll do that tomorrow when I'm back on my computer with the spreadsheets. 3.75 ERA looks really optimistic on first glance. Beckett has a 4.38 ERA and a 4.27 FIP over the last three seasons.
   45. Darren Posted: August 24, 2012 at 11:52 PM (#4217532)
Yes, they get rid of Gonzalez, Beckett and Crawford but they still have to replace them and the fact is it is unlikely that they are going to be able to reliably do so at the same or less money.


They have to replace their contributions for, what, about $60 mil/year? That seems quite doable.
   46. Dale Sams Posted: August 24, 2012 at 11:54 PM (#4217533)
LF:? Kalish eff if I know. Nava?? Upton? Hamilton? I guess Hamilton wouldn’t be so bad.
CF: Ellsbury?
RF: Ross?
3B WMB
SS Aviles? Ciriaco? Andrus if Ells is traded for him?
2B Pedroia
1B wtf?? Kotchman? Pena? what a joke. I wouldn’t be surprised if the team brought back Pena and everyone crowed over what a great move it was.
C Lavarnaway?

This team has literally become every mouthbreather who called into WEEI with a stupid idea.

We traded Rizzo and those other guys for two fringe pitching prospects?? Let the best 3B in the league walk (Beltre) because we were so high on Youk and AGon...now we're just letting them all walk ...for ####### what??? Money? To spend on who? At a minimum that's 12 WAR walking out the door. Crawford could have come back some next year...Beckett showed me he can still hit his spots. AGon is a ####### god on a steal of a contract!? GD IM LIVID.

There is no upside to this. It's 2009 except the FA field is a billion times weaker. If I hadn't of sworn I would never dump Boston, I would do it in a heartbeat. You know your team has ###### up when you feel Schadenfreude for your own team.
   47. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: August 24, 2012 at 11:56 PM (#4217538)
The Red Sox have a big job to do to fill the roster. What Dale rightly points out is that the 2013 roster, if this trade happens, is full of holes.

The implication of his post, though, seems to be that the Red Sox either will not spend the ~$75M they have under the salary cap, or that they'll spend all $75M just on Josh Hamilton and Casey Kotchman. I predict(~!) the Red Sox will not give Josh Hamilton a $60M per season contract.
   48. Dan Posted: August 24, 2012 at 11:57 PM (#4217541)
I wouldn’t be surprised if the team brought back Pena and everyone crowed over what a great move it was.


Really? It wouldn't surprise you if everyone was excited to see the Sox sign a 1B who is presently posting a 91 OPS+ with mediocre defense at age 34?
   49. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: August 24, 2012 at 11:57 PM (#4217542)
At a minimum that's 12 WAR walking out the door.
I need to check the spreadsheets, but I'm pretty sure I've got Crawford/Gonzalez/Beckett at 8-9 WAR for next season, and less and less as time goes by.
   50. The District Attorney Posted: August 24, 2012 at 11:59 PM (#4217543)
AGon is a ####### god on a steal of a contract!?
No.
   51. Dale Sams Posted: August 24, 2012 at 11:59 PM (#4217545)
I need to check the spreadsheets, but I'm pretty sure I've got Crawford/Gonzalez/Beckett at 8-9 WAR for next season, and less and less as time goes by.


Im high on them for some dumb reason i guess.
   52. Dan Posted: August 24, 2012 at 11:59 PM (#4217546)
AGon is a ####### god on a steal of a contract!? GD IM LIVID.


This is simply not true. Gonzalez is a first baseman who has stopped walking and hitting home runs, and seems to have improved his ability to hit for average. And he's heading on the wrong side of thirty. And he's owed $130M DOLLARS THAT IS NOT A STEAL OF A CONTRACT ON ANY LEVEL.
   53. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:03 AM (#4217548)
Uh oh. I still think I stand by my analysis, but this is concerning.

Dave Cameron loves this (still not completed) trade for the Red Sox. Next we'll be hearing confirmation from Will Carroll that he's seen the official trade documents in the commissioner's office ready to go.
   54. Dan Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:04 AM (#4217549)
Im high on them for some dumb reason i guess.


I think you're letting your Red Sox fandom overly impact your optimistic view on all 3 of these players. Imagine if all 3 of these guys were on the Yankees: They owed a declining and increasingly belligerent Beckett $30M for 2 more years and had signed Crawford to a historic contract only to see him contribute absolutely nothing over the first two seasons. Now imagine that they had traded Banuelos and Montero for Adrian Gonzalez, and then spent $154M to lock him up for 7 years only to see him stop getting on base and stop hitting the ball out of the park. Would you be excited that they were trading away 3 big names in August, or worried that they were going to take that money and spend more efficiently on better players?
   55. Dan Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:04 AM (#4217550)
Dave Cameron loves this (still not completed) trade for the Red Sox. Next we'll be hearing confirmation from Will Carroll that he's seen the official trade documents in the commissioner's office ready to go.


At least Ray thinks it's never going to happen. I think that outweighs the Cameron issue.
   56. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:05 AM (#4217553)
Im high on them for some dumb reason i guess.
You're high on Carl Crawford? You've spent the last year and a half calling him a terrible baseball player and a miserable human being to boot.

Or do you think that Gonzalez and Beckett alone are good for 10-12 WAR next year? Because I'll bet the under on that.
   57. Mattbert Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:09 AM (#4217557)
I guess Hamilton wouldn’t be so bad.

Hamilton would be a disaster in Boston. That would be the Crawford deal all over again.

1B wtf??

Don't worry, I'm sure they'll be able to negotiate an extension for Loney!

We traded Rizzo and those other guys for two fringe pitching prospects??

De La Rosa and Webster are not fringe prospects. Those guys are legit mid-rotation starter material. Jerry Sands isn't exactly chopped liver, either. He could probably manage an OPS north of .800 playing half his games at Fenway. At worst, he's a potential platoon partner for Kalish in the OF and whoever at 1B.

There is no upside to this. It's 2009 except the FA field is a billion times weaker.

This is a clown freakout, bro. After the last few years, why would you even want the Sox to be looking at the FA market as their principal means of reloading? I am sort of relieved that this winter's market is shaping up to be good but not great players who aren't going to command contracts in the neighborhood of 5/100 or more.

I have a lot more confidence in the front office's ability to go get an impact player or two via trade, and now they have a deeper farm system with more ML-ready prospects to dangle. This is a good thing, in my estimation.
   58. Jose Is The Most Absurd Thing on the Site Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:10 AM (#4217558)
They have to replace their contributions for, what, about $60 mil/year? That seems quite doable.


I don't think it's as easy to do as it seems. Additionally, to do it for year one without screwing up years 4-5 is tougher. One of the benefits that GOnzalez and Crawford brought is that they are still pretty young as free agents go. Both are younger than Hamilton who is probably going to require 6-7 years and more AAV than either player got to sign.

I noted it elsewhere in the last couple of days but the kvetching about Gonzalez is way over the top in some corners. Yes, he's having a down year but he's still awfully good and there is every reason to think he will have a much more typical Adrian Gonzalez season next year. Dale is of course over the top when he calls it a steal of a contract but I think it is a very fair contract and much less than what Gonzalez would get if he were a free agent at the end of the year.
   59. The Anthony Kennedy of BBTF (Scott) Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:10 AM (#4217560)
Yeah, Gonzalez may well be a good bet to be worth his contract. That doesn't make it a steal of a contract. And Gonzalez is the only player I'm actually sad to see go in this deal. Beckett is seriously unreliable and a tool. Crawford has been hurt the last two seasons and been #### when he's played while getting 2 years older with a skillset that doesn't scream graceful decline even absent injury.

Also, I'm not sure why we're so concerned about the lineup when it's the pitching that's been the problem the last two years. Yes, losing A-Gon won't help but it's not hard to imagine upgrades on Crawford vintage 2011-2012, and they won't be giving at bats to Nick Punto.
   60. Mattbert Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:12 AM (#4217561)
Next we'll be hearing confirmation from Will Carroll that he's seen the official trade documents in the commissioner's office ready to go.

It's not Will Carroll, but here you go...
@Kevin_Goldstein: Hearing that Red Sox/Dodgers deal is currently awaiting commish approval. Standard procedure when any money is in deal.
   61. Jose Is The Most Absurd Thing on the Site Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:14 AM (#4217563)
I have a lot more confidence in the front office's ability to go get an impact player or two via trade, and now they have a deeper farm system with more ML-ready prospects to dangle. This is a good thing, in my estimation.


Jed Lowrie for Mark Melancon
Josh Reddick for Andrew Bailey
Kevin Youkilis for a bag of baseball
Marco Scutaro for Clayton Mortensen

I still think Lowrie and Reddick are vastly overrated by their fans (hi Dale!) but the fact is there is no reason so far to think that Cherington is going to do a good job of getting an impact player in a trade.
   62. The Anthony Kennedy of BBTF (Scott) Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:14 AM (#4217564)
At least Ray thinks it's never going to happen.


So it's over?
   63. odds are meatwad is drunk Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:14 AM (#4217565)
I hear that soriano is avalible
   64. J. Sosa Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:15 AM (#4217566)
If it happens I'm happy. I've wanted them to blow it up since last year. I'm tired of watching Beckett throw meatballs that the Ichiro's of the world can crush for upper deck homers. I'm tired of feeling relief every time Crawford gets injured and paid 20M+ a year to not play. And I'm tired of wondering if the team is locked into a slap hitting first baseman for the better part of a decade at big money. Blow it up. I'll drive those guys to LA myself. *

*In other words I feel just like the Dale Sams camp. Only the exact opposite.

edit: ** Rays says its not going to happen? I need to find out if there is a line on this in Vegas...
   65. Textbook Editor Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:17 AM (#4217568)

It seems hard to believe, but there really is a decent chance that Lackey comes back from TJS as a decent pitcher. It's by no means a given, but I wouldn't be surprised if he's better than Beckett next year, for example. I hate Lackey as much as anyone else does, but I don't think we need to jettison him before seeing if he's able to rebound with a healthy elbow.


At the very least, if there's any bounce-back he has that "indentured servant" option year on his contract (at ML minimum) that would kick in since he had TJ surgery, and if he's even league average in 2013 that option year for 2015 at ML minimum is a big trade chip that I suspect would appeal to a lot of teams.

I'm OK with punting 2013; I just want to feel like there's a plan. Spending $ on FA isn't a Plan A.
   66. Jose Is The Most Absurd Thing on the Site Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:18 AM (#4217569)
I just want to feel like there's a plan.


I suspect a lot of the plan is hanging out in Portland, ME right now. Between Bradley and Bogaerts the Sox have some potential real impact players hanging out in AA who are likely to be ready to roll for 2014.
   67. The Anthony Kennedy of BBTF (Scott) Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:19 AM (#4217570)
Spending $ on FA isn't a Plan A


Whaddaya mean? That's exactly what Plan Angelos is!
   68. Infinite Joost (Voxter) Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:23 AM (#4217573)
"Dave Cameron loves this (still not completed) trade for the Red Sox. Next we'll be hearing confirmation from Will Carroll that he's seen the official trade documents in the commissioner's office ready to go."

Okay, I'm flipping. I hate it now.

I just think the Gonzalez thing is okay. Guys lose value after 30, especially big slow guys, especially if they can't move down the defensive
spectrum, especially if they play poorly at 30. People lose track of that too easily. Mark Teixeira was every bit as good as Gonzalez, and he's not a star anymore, or not much of one. For instance.
   69. Textbook Editor Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:23 AM (#4217574)
I suspect a lot of the plan is hanging out in Portland, ME right now.


I hope so... See, that's fun to me. Seeing guys come up, do well... that's fun. Buying John Lackey... not fun. Buying Nick Swisher... not fun. Bring up the kids. Fill in where you have to but don't go nuts with FA.

I confess I'm getting giddy at the thought of a rebuild. There was going to be very little this team could do at the margins in 2013/2014 to improve the team for 2015; now it has the room to do so.

I'll bet Amaro is wishing he could dump Howard's contract on ol' Ned right now...
   70. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:28 AM (#4217576)
Seeing guys come up, do well... that's fun. Buying John Lackey... not fun. Buying Nick Swisher... not fun.
But 2004 was fun, right? That was a lot of intelligently bought players. Winning... that's fun.

If Swisher can be had on a fair deal, maybe 3/27, then he's exactly the sort of complementary player that a club like the Sox should be acquiring. He's a league average player with a solid OBP and defensive flexibility between corner OF and 1B. I'm pretty sure that almost all the douchey things about Swisher that are grating today would become reasonably endearing once he had an 850 OPS for the Sox.
   71. Dan Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:29 AM (#4217578)
I'll bet Amaro is wishing he could dump Howard's contract on ol' Ned right now...


Amaro clearly has no intent to dump any of his crazy contracts. He already missed the chance to unload the Lee contract on the Dodgers.
   72. The Anthony Kennedy of BBTF (Scott) Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:29 AM (#4217579)
I'm pretty sure that almost all the douchey things about Swisher that are grating today would become reasonably endearing once he had an 850 OPS for the Sox.


That's how I've put up with Beckett in odd numbered years.
   73. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:31 AM (#4217581)
What I want for next year is something like a 90ish win roster, a club which should remain in contention through the summer and has a shot, if a bunch of pieces fall into place, at taking the division. At the same time, I don't want the Sox tying up lots of money in aging stars or trading away prospects for anyone who won't be part of the core in 2015.

2013 should be a bridge year, but a bridge year on a $170M budget doesn't mean you lose more games than you win. The Sox should be able to bridge to the next core while also playing meaningful baseball in September.
   74. Dale Sams Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:33 AM (#4217584)
.321/.382/.513

Yeah, that guy is a slap hitting first baseman. We traded Anthony Rizzo, let Beltre walk, and didn't let Youkilis even think about slumping because of that slap-hitter. And now we're letting him walk so we can spend the money on BJ Upton.

You guys are forgetting, this team was headed to 72-90 WITH AGon. This isn't Moneyball. Spreading the WAR out to replace AGon is just going to get you to 72-90.

And what if papi says at the end of the year. \"#### you guys." Well, there's another 14mill to spend on guys who will never replace him.
   75. Textbook Editor Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:34 AM (#4217586)
He already missed the chance to unload the Lee contract on the Dodgers.


If he had suggested Lee + Howard, maybe Ned does the deal!

2004 was fun--those were smartly bought players and traded-for players. More please.
   76. Dale Sams Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:35 AM (#4217590)
But 2004 was fun, right? That was a lot of intelligently bought players. Winning... that's fun.


Having 5 HOFers* (Im counting Damon and Nomar as 1/2 each..even if Nomar was a non-factor) kind of helps. Pedroia is the only guy on the team now that has a sniffing chance.

*Let's not nick-pick. I'm calling Manny and Papi HOFers, yes.
   77. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:41 AM (#4217594)
You guys are forgetting, this team was headed to 72-90 WITH AGon. This isn't Moneyball. Spreading the WAR out to replace AGon is just going to get you to 72-90.
If you believe the Red Sox have 72-win talent right now, then it is absolutely ####### imperative that they make this trade. If you believe the Red Sox have a 72-win team, then you must believe that they cannot compete in 2013 or 2014 with the current roster and contract obligations. How can they upgrade the roster by 20 wins with only $15-20M to spend? You should love this trade with a violent passion if you think the Sox are actually a .440 ballclub. If the Sox are that bad, getting out from under these contracts is the biggest no-brainer imaginable.

It's only if you think the Sox have the talent right now to compete and win in 2013 or 2014 that you can reasonably hate this trade.
   78. Infinite Joost (Voxter) Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:43 AM (#4217596)
You're also shitting yourself because the Sox are getting rid of a nine figure contract for a 30-year-old fatass who's having a shitty season.
   79. Mattbert Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:46 AM (#4217597)
I still think Lowrie and Reddick are vastly overrated by their fans (hi Dale!) but the fact is there is no reason so far to think that Cherington is going to do a good job of getting an impact player in a trade.

I said I had more confidence in the FO performing well in the trade market than the free agent market. That doesn't mean I have a lot of confidence in their ability to, well, to do much of anything really. But this trade is the most encouraging thing they've done in a while, so let's hope it's a good start. It'll certainly be more interesting than watching the same team try not to #### things up in the same way for the third straight year.
   80. Dale Sams Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:50 AM (#4217599)
You're also shitting yourself because the Sox are getting rid of a nine figure contract for a 30-year-old fatass who's having a shitty season.


Did you really call AGon a "30 year old fatass who's having a shitty season"?? Really? REALLY? The guy has three bad months, and he's a '30 year old fatass having a shitty season." WEEI is down the hall mouthbreather.
   81. Mattbert Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:50 AM (#4217600)
If Swisher can be had on a fair deal, maybe 3/27, then he's exactly the sort of complementary player that a club like the Sox should be acquiring. He's a league average player with a solid OBP and defensive flexibility between corner OF and 1B. I'm pretty sure that almost all the douchey things about Swisher that are grating today would become reasonably endearing once he had an 850 OPS for the Sox.

I love Swisher. He seems like a fun guy. What are the douchey things about him that I've missed? (Honest question. My opinion of him was formed several years ago, and I haven't watched much of the Yankees lately.)
   82. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:53 AM (#4217603)
Dale, calm down. You're going Piehole on us.
   83. Dale Sams Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:54 AM (#4217604)
You guys...and the Sox are literally going to have me down at urgent care tomorrow. I'm not even kidding. When you don't see me post here anymore you can say..."The Sox killed Johnny Pesky...and Dale Sams"
   84. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: August 25, 2012 at 12:56 AM (#4217605)
Well, there is Nick Swisher is a douche . jpg, for example. He seems like the most bro-tastic bro who ever bro'd - or, worse, he seems like he's trying to market himself as the most bro-tastic bro, which if you think about it is a super bro-like thing to do.

I will of course take all of this back when he's wearing a Red Sox uniform and flashing rock'n'roll horns at the fans on the monster. Then it will be charming.
   85. Infinite Joost (Voxter) Posted: August 25, 2012 at 01:00 AM (#4217608)
"Did you really call AGon a "30 year old fatass who's having a shitty season"?? Really? REALLY? The guy has three bad months, and he's a '30 year old fatass having a shitty season." WEEI is down the hall mouthbreather."

Which part of it isn't true? He's 30, he's having a crappy season, he's a big, slow, not-terribly-athletic guy. But you seem utterly blind to that.
   86. The Yankee Clapper Posted: August 25, 2012 at 01:04 AM (#4217610)
At the very least, if there's any bounce-back he has that "indentured servant" option year on his contract (at ML minimum) that would kick in since he had TJ surgery, and if he's even league average in 2013 that option year for 2015 at ML minimum is a big trade chip that I suspect would appeal to a lot of teams.

If Lackey is a pain in the ass earning $15M, what would he be like at the minimum? Don't think many teams would want to go down that road even with the discount. Besides, it seems likely Lackey would just threaten to retire unless he got a better deal.
   87. Dale Sams Posted: August 25, 2012 at 01:05 AM (#4217611)
He slumped the first three months. He's still playing near GG defense. He's got a .971 OPS in the second half. A guy slumps 3 months and he's a fatass having a shitty season?
   88. Mattbert Posted: August 25, 2012 at 01:07 AM (#4217613)
Swisher is a douche for boozily celebrating what appears to be either a pennant or a championship? I'm gonna need a little more than that.

I don't know, he strikes me as more of a harmlessly gregarious dude who enjoys playing baseball and smiles a lot. I mean, sure, he's a jock. Most ballplayers are.
   89. Dale Sams Posted: August 25, 2012 at 01:12 AM (#4217615)
Doesn't Occams razor suggest that with Crawford being 2 years removed from a great season, Lackey not being what they thought they were getting, Beckett being uneven....that the problem is not with the players but with their surroundings? How the eff does it help to get a new liver if you keep drinking like a fish?



   90. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: August 25, 2012 at 01:16 AM (#4217617)
Doesn't Occams razor suggest that with Crawford being 2 years removed from a great season, Lackey not being what they thought they were getting, Beckett being uneven....that the problem is not with the players but with their surroundings? How the eff does it help to get a new liver if you keep drinking like a fish?
Lackey was injured. Crawford, well, you've spent the whole season saying the problem was his character, his lack of intelligence, and his lack of talent. Why have you changed your mind?

On Swisher, Matt, well, you're probably right. He seems like he's trying, like he's playing at being that bro for marketing reasons, which grates. But that's could easily be just the uniform talking. (If anyone has better evidence, I'll walk it back again.)
   91. The Yankee Clapper Posted: August 25, 2012 at 01:16 AM (#4217618)
If Swisher can be had on a fair deal, maybe 3/27

Swisher is getting $10.25M this year and isn't really having a year that suggests he'll take a pay cut. While matching Jayson Werth's contract might be unrealistic on Nick's part, he won't come all that cheap. It will be tough for the Red Sox not to pay market price when everyone knows they have a pile of cash, and some folks might even want a premium to play in a "crazy clown town" environment.
   92. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: August 25, 2012 at 01:18 AM (#4217619)
Swisher is getting $10.25M this year and isn't really having a year that suggests he'll take a pay cut.
Well, he's a 2.5 WAR player heading into his early 30s. I wouldn't pay him more than $10M per season or lock him up for more than three seasons. If the market gets irrational, the Sox should get out.

The second half of your post is just fanboy wishcasting.
   93. odds are meatwad is drunk Posted: August 25, 2012 at 01:22 AM (#4217622)
Now trollng post this time, if theo was still with the team.how would.the season turned out?
   94. Infinite Joost (Voxter) Posted: August 25, 2012 at 01:22 AM (#4217623)
"He slumped the first three months. He's still playing near GG defense. He's got a .971 OPS in the second half. A guy slumps 3 months and he's a fatass having a shitty season?"

The first three months still count, you know.

Look, what I'm pointing out, about which you seem to have decided to not think, is that Gonzalez is neither young nor athletic, and he's on a huge contract. There's no particular reason to believe he's the player he was in San Diego. Most guys aren't as good in their 30s as they are in their 20s. And Gonzo isn't the kind of jock one should expect to be an exception.
   95. Cowboy Popup Posted: August 25, 2012 at 01:24 AM (#4217624)
Well, he's a 2.5 WAR player heading into his early 30s.

Only if you base your evaluation solely on BBRef's stats. Fangraphs has him at 3.2, 4.1, 3.8 and 2.6 (so far in 2012 despite missing time). I think Swisher is a decent bit better than 2.5 WAR and I sincerely doubt the market is going to value him at that rate. Swisher is going to get a lot more than 3/27.
   96. Dale Sams Posted: August 25, 2012 at 01:37 AM (#4217628)
What happened to "All we need is more corner production and not let Lackey and Wake pitch"?? How is this not on the coachs, manager and GM? They replaced a players manager with Valentine...Cherington traded Reddick for a reliever and let Youk go for nothing. When a team underperforms this much and all the players go on to better years when they're cut...and you know Beckett and AGon will finish 2012 strong (going out on a limb some here with Beckett) I'll bet Crawford produces fairly well for LA to....how does that happen?

All of a sudden these pinheads are going to make good decisions? I would much rather fire Ben, Bobby and Larry then let them drive the team further into the ground. On top of Youk and Shoppach, this just stinks of a malcontent dump with Crawford thrown in. I don't like Crawford, Beckett makes me mad...but I have no faith in the FO to do right.
   97. Dan Posted: August 25, 2012 at 01:40 AM (#4217629)
I could see Swisher working at something like 4/50.
   98. Cowboy Popup Posted: August 25, 2012 at 01:47 AM (#4217632)
I could see Swisher working at something like 4/50.

Andre Ethier, who is a comparable, but younger and slightly better hitter, got 5/85 negotiating with one team. I think 4/50 is a floor for Swisher.
   99. RB in NYC (Now Semi-Retired from BBTF) Posted: August 25, 2012 at 08:17 AM (#4217682)
On Swisher, Matt, well, you're probably right. He seems like he's trying, like he's playing at being that bro for marketing reasons, which grates. But that's could easily be just the uniform talking. (If anyone has better evidence, I'll walk it back again.)
Obviously this is pretty silly since none of us have the first clue what Nick Swisher is "really" like, but I think he really is that bro, or--at the least--he's doing the Steve Austin/The Rock thing of turning his actual personality up to 11.

Swish is the guy in Moneyball who has the story about asking someone from Cleveland what was going on Finley and Tawny Kitaen, at his pre-draft meeting, right? I think that's just who he is. I will say I can see how that would be incredibly obnoxious, though.

EDIT: And to attempt to add some actual thoughtful baseball content, I'd be stunned if Swish got less than $60 million for four years.
   100. Chip Posted: August 25, 2012 at 08:46 AM (#4217686)
The fortuitous timing of my getting involved in a big work project late last month, at the same time the team was transitioning from merely struggling to utterly collapsing, has given me enough critical and emotional distance to see this trade as reasonable.

But I still blame the need for it all on Beckett and Lester being mostly horrible. Decent performances by both would not have forced the team to be this worried about not just 2013 but beyond to the point they'd even contemplate the need for the salary cap flexibility this should bring.
Page 1 of 4 pages  1 2 3 >  Last ›

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Rough Carrigan
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Page rendered in 0.6320 seconds
56 querie(s) executed