Jeremy Reed to Boston?

[He Hate Me]

You had no dominant aces during the 6 trips to the Series from 1996-2003, but you did have several very good pitchers. The Sox had perhaps the two most dominant years ever from a pitcher, Pedro, in 1999 and 2000, yet they won the Series after Pedro came back to earth and had a better supporting cast in the rotation. Two very good pitchers is a better formula for success than one ace.

 

I tend to think of Andy Petite as a dominant pitcher. he had an incredible win-loss percentage after yankee losses. We also had Clemens for some of those years. Too many things have to work out for you if you dont have a true ace. True aces don't guarantee victories, but they sure as hell make it a lot easier.

[a700hitter]

I tend to think of Andy Petite as a dominant pitcher. he had an incredible win-loss percentage after yankee losses. We also had Clemens for some of those years. Too many things have to work out for you if you dont have a true ace. True aces don't guarantee victories, but they sure as hell make it a lot easier.

I don't know if the Yankees had any dominant pitchers during their Championship run, but they had big game pitchers (Wells, Pettitte, Clemens, Cone) who were capable of dominating an opponent in the post-season even if the regular season stats were not that great.

[ORS]

I tend to think of Andy Petite as a dominant pitcher. he had an incredible win-loss percentage after yankee losses. We also had Clemens for some of those years. Too many things have to work out for you if you dont have a true ace. True aces don't guarantee victories, but they sure as hell make it a lot easier.

I'm not trying to minimize the value of a true ace. For two years, when Pedro was at his peak, Sox fans felt more sure of a victory every fifth game than they did of the sun rising the next morning (pure hyperbole, but it makes the point). That said, I preferred the lesser-Pedro and not-quite-an-ace Schilling two years ago. While Pedro gave me 100% confidence to win 1/5 games, the duo gave me 80% confidence they'd win 2/5. Do the math. One times 20% (1/5) is 20%. Eighty percent (.8) times 40% (2/5) is 32%. I like a teams chances with two good pitchers more than one great one.

[He Hate Me]

I don't know if the Yankees had any dominant pitchers during their Championship run, but they had big game pitchers (Wells, Pettitte, Clemens, Cone) who were capable of dominating an opponent in the post-season even if the regular season stats were not that great.

 

yeah I shold rephrase my previous comment. During our run, we had guys who stepped it up when it counted. Normally you equate that to the guys with the most physical ability and talent. I guess that's why I really want an ace, because even if they're off during a big game, at least their physical talent can help to overcome it.

[He Hate Me]

I'm not trying to minimize the value of a true ace. For two years, when Pedro was at his peak, Sox fans felt more sure of a victory every fifth game than they did of the sun rising the next morning (pure hyperbole, but it makes the point). That said, I preferred the lesser-Pedro and not-quite-an-ace Schilling two years ago. While Pedro gave me 100% confidence to win 1/5 games, the duo gave me 80% confidence they'd win 2/5. Do the math. One times 20% (1/5) is 20%. Eighty percent (.8) times 40% (2/5) is 32%. I like a teams chances with two good pitchers more than one great one.

 

you didnt consider Schilling an ace in 2004? Wasnt he a 20 game winner with like 200 K's? From what I remember, the guy was damn good that year

[ORS]

My loose criteria for and "ace" type season are at least 9 K/9, a less than one WHIP, an OPS against less than .650, and an ERA+ of 150 or more. Curt's numbers for 2004 were 8.06 K/9, 1.06 WHIP, .657 OPS against, and 150 ERA+. He came close, hence the not-quite-an-ace moniker I gave him. This is silly arguing the semantics of what defines "ace pitcher", though. If it pleases you, continue to think you'd rather have one great pitcher instead of two very good ones, but I'd really appreciate some sort of substantive argument other than, "the Yankees could have used one in '04", if you are going to try and sway my opinion.

 

EDIT: W/L record is meaningless when discussing how dominant a pitcher has been.

[He Hate Me]

My loose criteria for and "ace" type season are at least 9 K/9, a less than one WHIP, an OPS against less than .650, and an ERA+ of 150 or more. Curt's numbers for 2004 were 8.06 K/9, 1.06 WHIP, .657 OPS against, and 150 ERA+. He came close, hence the not-quite-an-ace moniker I gave him. This is silly arguing the semantics of what defines "ace pitcher", though. If it pleases you, continue to think you'd rather have one great pitcher instead of two very good ones, but I'd really appreciate some sort of substantive argument other than, "the Yankees could have used one in '04", if you are going to try and sway my opinion.

 

EDIT: W/L record is meaningless when discussing how dominant a pitcher has been.

 

I rephrased my original argument after a700's post. It isnt aces I was really thinking of, it was big game pitchers. You want someone who can come up big when it matters most, and most of the time it is the best pitcher on your club who is that stopper. Sometimes though that isn't the case (Petite and Rocket), so I get what you're saying

[SchillingIsTheNatural]

I was joking about Manny and Papelbon for Ichiro and King Felix just so everyone knows. I'm obviously not that dumb and neither are the Ms...but maybe the Red Sox front office is to make the attempt.

[Beckett95]

from MLB trade rumors

 

A reliable source told me today about a three-way deal that is "imminent." It's always risky to throw around "imminent," but I'm just quoting him here.

 

Here's the scenario:

 

BOS gives: Bronson Arroyo, Tony Graffanino, PTBNL

 

BOS gets: Jeremy Reed, Will Ohman

 

CHC gives: Corey Patterson, Ohman

 

CHC gets: Raul Ibanez, Graffanino, cash

 

SEA gives: Reed, Ibanez, cash

 

SEA gets: Arroyo, Patterson, PTBNL

 

Let's evaluate. There's no doubt the Cubs would be making out like bandits in this trade. Corey Patterson is useless to them, even as a fourth outfielder. 28 year-old lefty Ohman tossed a solid 43 innings this year, and seems recovered from his January 2002 Tommy John surgery.

 

But Chicago's bounty seems to outweigh the former phenom and useful southpaw. Ibanez is on the hook for just $4.25MM in 2006, and the 33 year-old is probably good for a .290/.350/.460 line in 2006. He played 55 games in left field for the Mariners in 2005. I've projected him at .288 with 21 HR, 84 RBI, 89 runs, and 8 steals for 2006. Graffanino could probably chip in with some decent on-base skills from 2B or a utility role.

 

My Arroyo projection has him leading the Red Sox in wins with 16. Arroyo does a good job limiting his baserunners and should have an ERA under 4. I don't think Safeco would have a major effect on his numbers. Reed should continue to improve all facets of his game in '06, and would be a nice pickup for the Red Sox.

 

There may be a holdup in the deal because the Red Sox want to trade before Graffanino and Arroyo hit arbitration, and the Cubs want to wait. The word is that Mariners GM Bill Bavasi is strangely infatuated with Corey Patterson. If that's the case, Hendry should strike while the iron is hot. I don't have any information on where Matt Murton would find himself if the proposed trade takes place, but he wouldn't have a starting gig for the Cubs.

 

These deal is fine with me. Tony G and Alex Cora are basically the same thing, with Tony G being a better hitter. Arroyo has no use in the rotation as we have 6 guys there. Ohman gives us an other lefty option in the bullpen. This is a good deal for the sox.

[ksushi]

I like this deal a lot, provided rumors are true that the sox are done with the manny deal because of the whole extension thing.

 

Also the PTBNL better not be papelbon or lester.

[a700hitter]

Also the PTBNL better not be papelbon or lester.

Unless he goes 2-8 with a 6 run ERA.

[Beckett95]

Im guessing the PTBNL is a mid level to low level prospect. It would probally be a Jeremy West or Matt Van Der Bosch

[Beckett95]

Ohman's stats from last year

 

ERA---- G-----IP-----BB----SO

2.91--- 69---43.1----24-----45

[Beckett95]

sounds like this is a false rumor.

 

http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/extras/extra_bases/2006/01/no_way_on_3way.html

 

gordan edes says it aint happening

[ksushi]

Unless he goes 2-8 with a 6 run ERA.

 

I'm the least fickle member on this site. If papelbon goes 2-8 with a 6 run ERA, I will still love him.

[Ray10]

The Sox need a CF bad but not at the price of someone like Papelbon or Lester. Jeremy Reed is good but he isn't worth those guys not by a long shot. Those guys are going to be the future of this rotation and of this franchise. They shouldn't even be mentioned in a trade with Seattle for Reed. Unless of course. Felix comes our way too.

[jsinger121]

they shouldn't be mentioned in any trade. they will anchor the rotation for many yrs along with beckett if they can all stay healthy. i also would not trade marte as well. those 3 should untouchable.

[Cityofchampions33]

Gammons is saying that we're workin out a deal involving Marte for Lugo and Gathright, and use Gathright in a swing deal for Reed. That makes absoutely no sense to me. You trade a rare and blue chip 3B rospect for a 1 year contract SS, and an average and inexperinced CF (Reed). I really don't feel an urgaency anywhere but to fill the CF hole, and I' pretty sure we could get someoen decent as a fill--gap for a year until Ellsbury is ready.

[ksushi]

Well first don't get on reeds case, and second, I just finished reading a gammons article on boston.com that said the sox are not planning on trading marte. we've been hearing this all offseason that marte was going to be flipped for lugo and then crisp and then lugo and for awhile we were just going to give him away for free in a four way deal. tampa says they want him boston says no. I dont think hes going anywhere. its not going to happen dont fret.the sox may acquire gathwright, but it wont be for marte.

[jsinger121]

all these rumors are bull in my mind like the one today by tony mazz. he has been writing crap for last few months. he has no idea about the red sox farm system and he also has no idea about other teams farm systems like the orioles. he comes out and say the orioles will just throw in their top prospect Nick Markakis just like that. mazz probably doesn't even know who he is and just said thats who the sox would want because he is the o's top prospect.