Red Sox Re-Acquire Alex Gonzalez

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

Oh my' date=' he is a little more expensive! Don't break the bank! Who cares if he is gone after this season? We need to eventually find a long-term solution to SS (Hanley Ramirez, damn it). Right now, though, we need to get the best band-aid available and I don't think Gonzalez is it.[/quote']

Not overpaying is the difference between Boston's 2 world series titles this decade, to New York's none. I wouldn't scoff at something like that.

[a700hitter]

Not overpaying is the difference between Boston's 2 world series titles this decade' date=' to New York's none. I wouldn't scoff at something like that.[/quote']

The difference was that the Red Sox had the better players. It doesn't matter how you get them, just that you get them.

[BSN07]

I'm sure they do care about the $8 million' date=' but they have acted irresponsibly in the past, so why would I care if they overpaid for one more player for one stinking year? They usually overpay for 4, 5, or 6 years when they screw up. A 1 year $8 miilion hit for a SS when they spent $5.5 million on Smoltz and another $5 million on Penny? $8 million on Guzman would be a bargain compare to that.[/quote']

 

Again, just run a worst case scenario by you. The Sox get Guzman. And some GM decides to make Hanley/Hardy/Escobar/Tulo/Andrus/ Some young talented SS, and the Sox don't get in on it because of Guzman. How would you look at the acquisition then?

 

I'm just trying to get you to see a few months down the road that move could look really bad.

[TedWilliams101]

Not overpaying is the difference between Boston's 2 world series titles this decade' date=' to New York's none. I wouldn't scoff at something like that.[/quote']

 

How is paying $8 million to fill a big hole just for the rest of this season comparable to the Yankees throwing huge money at old, broken down pitchers? I mean, isn't that what the Sox did this year, giving Smoltz and Penny more than $11 million this season (sure, not as extreme, but still damned bad)?

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

How is paying $8 million to fill a big hole just for the rest of this season

 

He's on the books for the same amount for next season. No team is going to take on that contract. It could very well hinder our offseason moves and/or next year's trade deadline.

[TedWilliams101]

Again, just run a worst case scenario by you. The Sox get Guzman. And some GM decides to make Hanley/Hardy/Escobar/Tulo/Andrus/ Some young talented SS, and the Sox don't get in on it because of Guzman. How would you look at the acquisition then?

 

I'm just trying to get you to see a few months down the road that move could look really bad.

 

Why would Guzman get in the way of acquiring a future SS?

[BSN07]

How is paying $8 million to fill a big hole just for the rest of this season comparable to the Yankees throwing huge money at old' date=' broken down pitchers? I mean, isn't that what the Sox did this year, giving Smoltz and Penny more than $11 million this season (sure, not as extreme, but still damned bad)?[/quote']

 

It's not just for this season. It's for next year too. This is one of the points against a Guzman acquisition.

[TedWilliams101]

He's on the books for the same amount for next season. No team is going to take on that contract. It could very well hinder our offseason moves and/or next year's trade deadline.

 

$8 million is really going to hinder our offseason moves? Really?

[BSN07]

Why would Guzman get in the way of acquiring a future SS?

 

I'm not saying it's 100%. I'm saying "what if" he's the reason they don't get in on other SS. They might figure they are paying Guzman 8M, and give Lowrie another shot. So basically we are looking at a Lowrie/Lugo platoon to start off 2010.

 

 

 

Still sound good?

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

The difference was that the Red Sox had the better players. It doesn't matter how you get them' date=' just that you get them.[/quote']

The Red Sox got their good players and had the resources, both in money and in prospects, to go get more good players, and keep getting them. Because they don't part with huge, huge sums of money or top prospects unless they are sure that it is a good deal.

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

$8 million is really going to hinder our offseason moves? Really?

Why wouldn't it? Until you've taken a good long look at the team's income statements, why scoff at the prospect of $8 million getting in the way of future moves? This isn't Monopoly money we're dealing with here.

[a700hitter]

Again, just run a worst case scenario by you. The Sox get Guzman. And some GM decides to make Hanley/Hardy/Escobar/Tulo/Andrus/ Some young talented SS, and the Sox don't get in on it because of Guzman. How would you look at the acquisition then?

 

I'm just trying to get you to see a few months down the road that move could look really bad.

If $8 million is going to prevent the Red Sox from making a major acquisition, then the owners should just fire the entire FO, because they would be incompetent. The FO was willing to sign Teixeira to an 8 year contract when they were still obligated to Lowell for 2 more years at $14millio/year. Lowell was coming off hip surgery and he can't play any other position. That huge contract did not deter them from going after Tex, so why would a measely $8 million bring this team to its knees. I'm not buying your premise. It's faulty and the past actions of the Red Sox FO have shown that it is invalid.

[a700hitter]

The Red Sox got their good players and had the resources' date=' both in money and in prospects, to go get more good players, and keep getting them. Because they don't part with huge, huge sums of money or top prospects unless they are sure that it is a good deal.[/quote']But the Yankees have the better players this season, and they went about it a different way. It doesn't matter how you get them. All that matters is that you have the better players.

[BSN07]

If $8 million is going to prevent the Red Sox from making a major acquisition' date=' then the owners should just fire the entire FO, because they would be incompetent. The FO was willing to sign Teixeira to an 8 year contract when they were still obligated to Lowell for 2 more years at $14millio/year. Lowell was coming off hip surgery and he can't play any other position. That huge contract did not deter them from going after Tex, so why would a measely $8 million bring this team to its knees. I'm not buying your premise. It's faulty and the past actions of the Red Sox FO have shown that it is invalid.[/quote']

 

Fine, money aside. What about Roster space? If the brought in someone, someone has to go. You think it will be easy to deal Guzman at 8M? Do you think they will give up on Lowrie?

 

I mean I'm not saying your wrong. I guess it's just my personal preference though. In a nutshell this is how I see it:D

 

Agon+Glove-Bat+FA after 09> Guzman+Bat-Glove- contract the runs through 2010

[TedWilliams101]

Here's also a food for thought, in 04, 07, and 08 (when we would have easily won the WS if we were healthy) the Sox had their 3 highest ever payrolls ($127+ million, $143+ million, and $133+ million). The Sox failed in '03 so they went out and spent money ($29 million/year) to get them the championship in 04. Same thing happened after '06 ($23 million/year). Don't tell me that simply "saving" money is what got the Sox their championships. They realized they needed to go out and spend for talent and they did.

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

If $8 million is going to prevent the Red Sox from making a major acquisition' date=' then the owners should just fire the entire FO, because they would be incompetent.[/quote']

 

Incompetence means not spending insane sums of money like a drunken trucker at a Las Vegas casino?

 

The FO was willing to sign Teixeira to an 8 year contract when they were still obligated to Lowell for 2 more years at $14millio/year.

 

Yes, then Teixeira returned to the Yankees to see if they would up their offer, which they did. This has been covered many, many, many times - the Red Sox were not getting Teixeira. The plan, if they ultimately did somehow get Tex, was to trade Lowell, who still some had some value left at that point. He would have flipped to SF or maybe the Dodgers.

 

Lowell was coming off hip surgery and he can't play any other position. That huge contract did not deter them from going after Tex, so why would a measely $8 million bring this team to its knees.

 

Because Lowell could've and would've been dealt in that scenario. There are several NL teams that could have used a bat at little cost (in prospects, Sox probably would have eaten a bit of his contract as well).

 

Guzman, would be untradeable. At this point in his career, he isn't great at either side of the game (batting/fielding). He's a complete waste of money. Lowell still has a good bat. Gonzalez can still play defense. Guzman isn't great at either.

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

But the Yankees have the better players this season' date=' and they went about it a different way. It doesn't matter how you get them. All that matters is that you have the better players.[/quote']

The Yankees have the better players virtually every season. And the WS scoreboard for this decade is still 2-0 Red Sox. What's your point?

[Looch Ness Monster]

For the record' date=' his UZR/150 is 4.0[/quote']

 

And it was 16.9 in 2006. Definitely a VERY significant difference.

[a700hitter]

Fine, money aside. What about Roster space? If the brought in someone, someone has to go. You think it will be easy to deal Guzman at 8M? Do you think they will give up on Lowrie?

 

I mean I'm not saying your wrong. I guess it's just my personal preference though. In a nutshell this is how I see it:D

 

Agon+Glove-Bat+FA after 09> Guzman+Bat-Glove- contract the runs through 2010

I don't think it would be anywhere close to the problem that trading a gimpy Lowell would have been. If worse to worse, they'd carry two MIF's. Lowrie could play any IF position including first. We do have 3 first basemen currently. That's at least one too many. One has to go by next season, don't you think?

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

Here's also a food for thought' date=' in 04, 07, and 08 (when we would have easily won the WS if we were healthy) the Sox had their 3 highest ever payrolls ($127+ million, $143+ million, and $133+ million). The Sox failed in '03 so they went out and spent money ($29 million/year) to get them the championship in 04. Same thing happened after '06 ($23 million/year). Don't tell me that simply "saving" money is what got the Sox their championships. They realized they needed to go out and spend for talent and they did.[/quote']

 

Terrific. But did they overpay? In the case of 2007, Lugo did nothing for us, so the $9 million we threw at him is pretty moot since it didn't help us win.

 

The Red Sox would have easily won the World Series in 2005 if they actually had pitching, by the way.

[TedWilliams101]

Guzman is 31 years old and is an above average offensive SS who has been especially good the last 3 seasons. How is that untradeable? Yes, we might have had to eat a bit of his contract, but that is still better than Gonzalez.

 

Also, Guzman isn't the only guy we could have had instead of Gonzalez. He certainly isn't my favorite target.

[Looch Ness Monster]

Question: How many players not on the roster's contracts are we currently eating right now? It seems like too many.

[a700hitter]

The Yankees have the better players virtually every season. And the WS scoreboard for this decade is still 2-0 Red Sox. What's your point?

No they have not. The Yankee teams in 2004 and 2007 in particular were not better than the Red Sox. The Red Sox clearly had the better players those years. The Yankee starting pitching in 2004 was truly a patchwork of mediocre and over the hill players. The 2007 Yankee pitching was so poor that it had to lure Clemens from retirement. My point stands. The team with the better players usually is better over the 162 game schedule and they have a big advantage in the playoffs. It doesn't matter how you acquire those players.

[TedWilliams101]

The Yankees have the better players virtually every season. And the WS scoreboard for this decade is still 2-0 Red Sox. What's your point?

 

To be fair, the Yankees have still dominated in the regular season, they have just come up on the wrong side during the playoffs. I'm not sure if you knew this, but luck plays a HUGE part in short baseball series. Their payroll wasn't the problem, it was that their pitching just wasn't quite good enough. Looks like they have fixed that.

[schillingouttheks]

It's not a question of overpaying. It's a question of what you overpay for. The Yankees made a habit throughout the earlier years of this decade up until last season to overpay for old, established veteran players who were on the downside of their careers. Obviously there's an exception here or there, but think about Jason Giambi, Johnny Damon, Gary Sheffield, Kevin Brown, etc. Those are why the Yankees had such a high payroll but nothing to show for it.

 

On the other hand, this past off-season the Yankees overpaid for exactly the types of pieces you overpay for. Mark Teixeira is a young talent in the earlier years of his prime and puts up tremendous numbers. CC Sabathia still has years left that will keep him at the top of that rotation. Burnett doesn't exactly fall into the worthy category of being overpaid, but if he had stayed healthy throughout his career with his potential to be absolutely dominant, one could say it's worth it.

 

It's not the money that the team spends. It's the quality of the player they spend it on. They spent the money on pieces that would only cause logjams and long-term commitments in the past. Now, with a signing of a Mark Teixeira, overpaying is acceptable and the long-term bind they have to him is not a problem. This off-season they spent their money on the correct players.

[a700hitter]

Incompetence means not spending insane sums of money like a drunken trucker at a Las Vegas casino?

No, but they would be incompetent if they had squandered so much of the team's resources that an $8 million write down would prevent them from doing future deals.

 

 

Yes' date=' then Teixeira returned to the Yankees to see if they would up their offer, which they did. This has been covered many, many, many times - the Red Sox were not getting Teixeira. The plan, if they ultimately did somehow get Tex, was to trade Lowell, who still some had some value left at that point. He would have flipped to SF or maybe the Dodgers.[/quote']How much trade value did he have left at $28 million/2yrs when he couldn't jog before march and he has looked like a wounded animal all season? I think it would be easier to move Guzman at $8 million for 1 year. The point is not whether they got or could get Teixeira. You are missing the boat with that argument. The point is thta Lowell's huge albatross of a contract did not prevent the FO from looking to make a big acquisition that would have put Lowell on the bench.

[TedWilliams101]

Not just that, but they were fine with just eating Lowell's contract if necessary since they pursued Adrian Gonzalez. They have the money, it's just a matter of whether or not they want to spend it.

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

Guzman is 31 years old and is an above average offensive SS who has been especially good the last 3 seasons. How is that untradeable?

 

He hasn't OPS'd .800 in either of the past two seasons, and his OBP is merely average. All well and good, but not worth his contract.

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

No' date=' but they would be incompetent if they had squandered so much of the team's resources that an $8 million write down would prevent them from doing future deals.[/quote']

 

Is that right? Is it impossible that JWH, the guy who signs the checks, is feeling the crunch financially? The economy does suck lately, and he has been forced to eat his share of blown money.

 

Word of advice, don't criticize the team not breaking the bank for Player X unless you have inside knowledge of their financial state.

 

How much trade value did he have left at $28 million/2yrs when he couldn't jog before march and he has looked like a wounded animal all season?

 

For a team like the Giants, who have always been a team with good pitching that just needs a bat, Lowell would have been a good fit. The Red Sox would have asked for anything useful in return.

 

Why does it matter how Lowell's looked this season? His 2009 performance is moot in this discussion.

 

I think it would be easier to move Guzman at $8 million for 1 year.

 

Guzman isn't Lowell in that there is nothing exciting about his offense or defense. Lowell's defense would have been a question mark to whoever acquired him, but his bat isn't a mystery. Anybody that would take Guzman off our hands would only be doing so as a stopgap for another MiLB shortstop they hope to take over the job in another year.

 

The point is thta Lowell's huge albatross of a contract did not prevent the FO from looking to make a big acquisition that would have put Lowell on the bench.

 

No, it would have put him in another uniform.

[TedWilliams101]

He hasn't OPS'd .800 in either of the past two seasons' date=' and his OBP is merely average. All well and good, but not worth his contract.[/quote']

 

He is a SS. Very few SS OPS above .800. The only guys who do are either completely untouchable (Hanley, etc) or old (Tejada, etc). I'm sure there would be interest next year in a 32 year old SS who can hit above .300, can put up a mid-700 OPS, and is slightly below-average fielder.