Updates on ex-Sox players etc.

[a700hitter]

For 1 year.

 

Manny had off years too you know. As did Papi and a whole host of superstars. It happens, I have no reason to be worried about Gonzo moving forward.

^ You might want to reconsider this statement. The years that we had Manny from age 29 to 36, pretty much could be stamped as awesome. His worst season was in 2007, and I 'll take that as a worst year any time.

[a700hitter]

I know you aren't suggesting that Gonzo is Manny, but I'll just say it: Gonzo isn't even remotely in the same class as Manny in terms of being a hitter. Not even close.

 

Just go by ops+ numbers, because those are park-adjusted. Here are Manny's ops+ numbers from his first full season (age 23) through his age 30 season:

 

147

146

144

146

174

186

162

184

 

Now here are Gonzalez' ops+ numbers from his first full season (age 24) through his age 30 season:

 

127

126

140

162

152

154

106

 

Don't get me wrong - Gonzo has been a tremendous hitter. But Manny was otherworldly...one of the best the sport has ever seen. Gonzo has had one season with an ops+ of 155 or higher. Manny had three seasons of an ops+ of 174 or more three times by the age of 30. Manny's worst pre-30 season (by ops+) was a 144. That number would have been 4th on Gonzalez' list.

 

So I get your point - that this may be just a down year for Gonzalez. And I hope you're right. But Manny *never* had a down year like what Gonzalez is having this year. Not remotely.

He is in his class financially, but in no other way. I agree.

[BornToRun]

^ You might want to reconsider this statement. The years that we had Manny from age 29 to 36' date=' pretty much could be stamped as awesome. His worst season was in 2007, and I 'll take that as a worst year any time.[/quote']

 

Okay, I'll grant you Manny but I was just making a point that Adrian isn't the only superstar to have an off year. I'm not worried about him. I wasn't trying to compare thy're ability. His and David's are just the first two names that came to mind.

[a700hitter]

Okay' date=' I'll grant you Manny but I was just making a point that Adrian isn't the only superstar to have an off year. I'm not worried about him. I wasn't trying to compare thy're ability. His and David's are just the first two names that came to mind.[/quote']I am. An injured shoulder is nothing to treat lightly. Bad shoulders have robbed many a hitter of his power. If he can't hit 30 bombs or close to that for the Sox, he ain't worth $22 million/year.

[BornToRun]

I am. An injured shoulder is nothing to treat lightly. Bad shoulders have robbed many a hitter of his power. If he can't hit 30 bombs or close to that for the Sox' date=' he ain't worth $22 million/year.[/quote']

 

Well he hit 27 last year and this is an off year so far. He lived up to the hype in 2011 and I think 2013 onward, based on what we've seen over his career so far, will be more in line with what he did last year and with San Diego.

[a700hitter]

Well he hit 27 last year and this is an off year so far. He lived up to the hype in 2011 and I think 2013 onward' date=' based on what we've seen over his career so far, will be more in line with what he did last year and with San Diego.[/quote']I hope so. I also hope that this down season is not a result of a bad shoulder.

[BornToRun]

you really should try optimism some time. It's a lot less stressful.

[Bellhorn04]

Reddick is 0 for his last 21.

[Orange Juiced]

Youkilis in his last 12 games has put up this line: 41 ab, 7 r, 5 h, 2 hr, 4 rbi, .122/.280/.268/.548

 

Jed Lowrie is injured and hasn't played since July 14. And in his previous 29 games (before going on the DL) had put up this line: 93 ab, 11 r, 15 h, 2 hr, 8 rbi, .161/.282/.269/.551

 

And Reddick is 0 for his last 21 as you said, but beyond that, here's his line the last 10 games: 42 ab, 4 r, 6 h, 1 hr, 4 rbi, .143/.182/.333/.515

[kapsis21]

and still people whine.. i think they love to do it..

[a700hitter]

and still people whine.. i think they love to do it..

It could because Bailey has contributed nothing, Sweeney is out for the rest of the season and he didn't hit a single Home Run in 2012, and Melancon's ERA is still over 8. Oh, and the White Sox are ahead of us in the Wild Card race and Lillishit is gone already and the minor league pitcher we got is a piece of garbage.

[Orange Juiced]

It could because Bailey has contributed nothing' date=' Sweeney is out for the rest of the season and he didn't hit a single Home Run in 2012, and Melancon's ERA is still over 8. Oh, and the White Sox are ahead of us in the Wild Card race and Lillishit is gone already and the minor league pitcher we got is a piece of garbage.[/quote']

 

What he said right there.

[ibot2much]

Derek Lowe designated for assignment by the Guardians......bad last few starts.

[kapsis21]

It could because Bailey has contributed nothing' date=' Sweeney is out for the rest of the season and he didn't hit a single Home Run in 2012, and Melancon's ERA is still over 8. Oh, and the White Sox are ahead of us in the Wild Card race and Lillishit is gone already and the minor league pitcher we got is a piece of garbage.[/quote']

 

we took 3 out of 4 from the Whitesox. trading Youk has no effect on our winning. trading Lowrie has no effect on our winning.

there is always 2 sides to the coin. and if you are not willing to look at the other side of the coin well i dont have much to add.

would Reddick hit better at Fenway, i dont know, he is a pull hitter and our RF is big. so his numbers might have been slight bit worse. Lowrie never stayed healthy you knew that too so getting Melancon was some assurity in the bullpen.. no body thought Melancon was going to suck this bad. and he is making a slow progress turnaround.

let Bailey come back.

 

if you want to blame anything the biggest mistake was the Bard transition. trading Youk/Lowrie/Reddick was not as bad as f***ing up Bard entirely.

 

edit: Reddick does have a rocket of an arm though.. f***ing loved it. when was the last time we had an outfield assist.. i remember Manny days.. that says how long it has been.

[a700hitter]

Derek Lowe designated for assignment by the Guardians......bad last few starts.

He's definitely running on fumes. He can be very streaky too. He pitched himself out of the post season rotation in 2004 with a horrible September. All in all, how much worse could he be than Cook. There is a chance he could be better. Why not explore it? He also has experience pitching out of the bullpen.

[Orange Juiced]

He's definitely running on fumes. He can be very streaky too. He pitched himself out of the post season rotation in 2004 with a horrible September. All in all' date=' how much worse could he be than Cook. There is a chance he could be better. Why not explore it? He also has experience pitching out of the bullpen.[/quote']

 

You'd have to cut someone from the 40-man roster. Who? Cook? Fine, but as I pointed out already, Lowe's numbers are actually considerably worse than Cook's. So I'm not sure how it's an upgrade.

 

But we're talking about varying degrees of suck, so maybe it's worth a shot.

[a700hitter]

we took 3 out of 4 from the Whitesox. trading Youk has no effect on our winning. trading Lowrie has no effect on our winning.

there is always 2 sides to the coin. and if you are not willing to look at the other side of the coin well i dont have much to add.

would Reddick hit better at Fenway, i dont know, he is a pull hitter and our RF is big. so his numbers might have been slight bit worse. Lowrie never stayed healthy you knew that too so getting Melancon was some assurity in the bullpen.. no body thought Melancon was going to suck this bad. and he is making a slow progress turnaround.

let Bailey come back.

 

if you want to blame anything the biggest mistake was the Bard transition. trading Youk/Lowrie/Reddick was not as bad as f***ing up Bard entirely.

 

edit: Reddick does have a rocket of an arm though.. f***ing loved it. when was the last time we had an outfield assist.. i remember Manny days.. that says how long it has been.

We are on the short end of all those trades big time-- as of now. There's not even a question. The Youk thing was not a trade. We gave him away. My beef is still that he should have been given to the NL. We are fighting the White Sox for a Wild Card. That was just stupid IMO. This dead horse was made into glue weeks ago. The only thing that will ever convince me that the Youk to the White Sox move was not stupid is if the prospect we got makes our rotation. That's a real long shot. BTW, Youk did bash in or skulls in the game we lost to the White Sox. We should've swept them.

[BornToRun]

How much is left on Derek's contract? He's been 32 different kinds of awful this year but if he's incredibly cheap, why the hell not?

[a700hitter]

How much is left on Derek's contract? He's been 32 different kinds of awful this year but if he's incredibly cheap' date=' why the hell not?[/quote']If he passes through waivers and no one claims him or trades for him, I think we would only be responsible for a pro-rated portion of the league minimum salary,

[kapsis21]

We are on the short end of all those trades big time-- as of now. There's not even a question. The Youk thing was not a trade. We gave him away. My beef is still that he should have been given to the NL. We are fighting the White Sox for a Wild Card. That was just stupid IMO. This dead horse was made into glue weeks ago. The only thing that will ever convince me that the Youk to the White Sox move was not stupid is if the prospect we got makes our rotation. That's a real long shot. BTW' date=' Youk did bash in or skulls in the game we lost to the White Sox. We should've swept them.[/quote']

 

i hear you completely, but Youk is having a down year and it was about time "If he was creating a ruckus with BV saying i am the veteran i need to be out there"... we got Stewart who is still in AAA and hope that he can make into the big league roster next year.

also we got Jose De la Torre for Lillibridge, who has decent numbers in AAA. lets wait for the trade to work itself out.

[Orange Juiced]

We are on the short end of all those trades big time-- as of now. There's not even a question.

 

Trade Evaluator

 

Scutaro for Mortensen: Win for the Red Sox, despite your protestations. Mortensen has been better this year than Scutaro, even if you think Mortensen in general is a big turd.

 

Lowrie/Weiland for Melancon: Loss for the Red Sox. No other way to put it, even if Lowrie has really struggled and is now injured. Melancon has just been pretty bad.

 

Youkilis for Lillibridge/Stewart: Loss for the Red Sox statistically. But it did appear that they needed to move Youks, and this was apparently the best offer they could get under those circumstances. Youks is slumping and is banged up again, so let's wait a while before evaluating this one for sure because they got a pretty decent pitching prospect back in Stewart, and it'll take time to see if that was a good move.

 

Reddick for Bailey/Sweeney: Right now, a pretty big loss for the Red Sox, since Sweeney isn't very good and Bailey has been injured all year. Reddick's serious slump notwithstanding, he's had a really good year for Oakland. But if Bailey returns for the stretch run and provides them with a fresh, dominant bullpen arm, that could be huge.

 

Breslow for Albers: Win for the Red Sox. Breslow is better and provides the Sox with more flexibility in the bullpen. Adding another lefty allows them to easily slide Morales into the rotation, which is an improvement there over Cook as well.

 

So as of now, I see two wins and three losses for Cherington on his deals, but one of those losses is really a wait-and-see because there's a chance Stewart turns out to be pretty good.

[kapsis21]

^^ Lillibridge for De la Torre. hope he can show up at the big league level.. he had a decent ERA at AAA

[BornToRun]

Plus, moving Youks allowed us to put Gonzalez back in his normal position and let WMB play everyday.

[a700hitter]

Trade Evaluator

 

Scutaro for Mortensen: Win for the Red Sox, despite your protestations. Mortensen has been better this year than Scutaro, even if you think Mortensen in general is a big turd.

 

Lowrie/Weiland for Melancon: Loss for the Red Sox. No other way to put it, even if Lowrie has really struggled and is now injured. Melancon has just been pretty bad.

 

Youkilis for Lillibridge/Stewart: Loss for the Red Sox statistically. But it did appear that they needed to move Youks, and this was apparently the best offer they could get under those circumstances. Youks is slumping and is banged up again, so let's wait a while before evaluating this one for sure because they got a pretty decent pitching prospect back in Stewart, and it'll take time to see if that was a good move.

 

Reddick for Bailey/Sweeney: Right now, a pretty big loss for the Red Sox, since Sweeney isn't very good and Bailey has been injured all year. Reddick's serious slump notwithstanding, he's had a really good year for Oakland. But if Bailey returns for the stretch run and provides them with a fresh, dominant bullpen arm, that could be huge.

 

Breslow for Albers: Win for the Red Sox. Breslow is better and provides the Sox with more flexibility in the bullpen. Adding another lefty allows them to easily slide Morales into the rotation, which is an improvement there over Cook as well.

 

So as of now, I see two wins and three losses for Cherington on his deals, but one of those losses is really a wait-and-see because there's a chance Stewart turns out to be pretty good.

In the post to which I responded, the Breslow trade was not mentioned. I already said theat was a good trade in a vacuum, but it didn't address the teams needs.

 

As for the others, they are all big losers. If you want to continue to beat the drum for the bush leaguer Mortensen, go ahead. That trade was a salary dump. No one wants Mortensen. The Giants the first place team in the NL West made a move to reinforce their team by getting Scutaro. It's just a ridiculous argument. Scutaro is a commodity with value. Mortensen is not. I thought we had moved on from this.

 

As for Youk's, if you wanted him to clear a path for WMB and you were going to get nothing for him, send him to the NL. Unless Zach Stewart makes our rotation, this was a stupid move. Your argument may make you feel good about the Youk give away. It may even convince others, but it doesn't change my mind. My score is 0 for 4.

[a700hitter]

Plus' date=' moving Youks allowed us to put Gonzalez back in his normal position and let WMB play everyday.[/quote']He was going to leave. No one is saying he shouldn't, but he should have been sent to the NL.

[Orange Juiced]

In the post to which I responded, the Breslow trade was not mentioned. I already said theat was a good trade in a vacuum, but it didn't address the teams needs.

 

As for the others, they are all big losers. If you want to continue to beat the drum for the bush leaguer Mortensen, go ahead. That trade was a salary dump. No one wants Mortensen. The Giants the first place team in the NL West made a move to reinforce their team by getting Scutaro. It's just a ridiculous argument. Scutaro is a commodity with value. Mortensen is not. I thought we had moved on from this.

 

As for Youk's, if you wanted him to clear a path for WMB and you were going to get nothing for him, send him to the NL. Unless Zach Stewart makes our rotation, this was a stupid move. Your argument may make you feel good about the Youk give away. It may even convince others, but it doesn't change my mind. My score is 0 for 4.

 

Let's go back to Mortensen-Scutaro for a minute because you truly are baffling me here. If you're suggesting that Mortensen simply isn't a good pitcher, fine, whatever. His last two seasons he's been a really good pitcher when he's pitched in the major leagues. His statistics are a record of WHAT HE HAS ACTUALLY DONE, not what his sub-90's fastball suggests he *should* do or *should* have done. If he went up there throwing shot puts but recorded 80+ innings of 3.10 era ball, all that means is that he has put up 80 innings of 3.10 ball

 

The fact of the matter is, whether he ever amounts to anything more than a last-guy-in-a-major-league-bullpen kind of guy or not, what he's given the Red Sox this season is 23 innings of 1.17 era, 379 era+, 0.87 whip baseball. That's what he has ACTUALLY done on the field while playing at the major league level for the Boston Red Sox.

 

That actual performance has been more valuable in the major leagues this year than what Marco Scutaro has ACTUALLY given his team this season, by a sizeable margin in fact.

 

So if you're going to evaluate the trade on actual results instead of what you think *should* be the results, you have to say that at this point in time, the trade is a win for Boston.

 

Just like if you're going to evaluate Reddick - Bailey on what has actually happened on the field this season, obviously you give the win to Reddick. But if you go based on how good a player each guy is, Bailey has been by FAR a better player than Reddick up to the start of this season. By a MILE.

 

In Reddick's three seasons (albeit in limited playing time) leading up to 2012 he contributed +1.4 wins above replacement. In Bailey's three seasons leading up to 2012 he contributed +6.2 wins above replacement. Bailey was one of the best relief pitchers in baseball for three years running....Reddick was a minor leaguer who never hit more than 7 homers in a major league season up to that point.

 

Not saying that Reddick didn't have talent, but if you go by what they had done in the majors up to that point, it's a no-brainer - Bailey destroyed Reddick.

 

But - and here is my point, obviously - if you go by their actual performance on the field since the trade, of course he's outperformed Bailey, who hasn't even played an inning yet for the Red Sox.

 

So are you going to be consistent? Are you going to hold each trade to the same standard and apply the same rubric for your evaluation? I didn't think a whole lot of Mortensen before the trade but the fact of the matter is, the dude has pitched extremely well for the Red Sox when given the chance. I don't care if he's done it with spitballs, gyroballs, sub-60 mph "fast"balls, whatever. He's been tremendous. He's been better than Scutaro has, period. No amount of mental gymnastics can demonstrate otherwise.

[a700hitter]

Let's go back to Mortensen-Scutaro for a minute because you truly are baffling me here. If you're suggesting that Mortensen simply isn't a good pitcher' date=' fine, whatever. His last two seasons he's been a really good pitcher when he's pitched in the major leagues. His statistics are a record of WHAT HE HAS ACTUALLY DONE, not what his sub-90's fastball suggests he *should* do or *should* have done. If he went up there throwing shot puts but recorded 80+ innings of 3.10 era ball, all that means is that [b']he has put up 80 innings of 3.10 ball[/b]

 

The fact of the matter is, whether he ever amounts to anything more than a last-guy-in-a-major-league-bullpen kind of guy or not, what he's given the Red Sox this season is 23 innings of 1.17 era, 379 era+, 0.87 whip baseball. That's what he has ACTUALLY done on the field while playing at the major league level for the Boston Red Sox.

 

That actual performance has been more valuable in the major leagues this year than what Marco Scutaro has ACTUALLY given his team this season, by a sizeable margin in fact.

 

So if you're going to evaluate the trade on actual results instead of what you think *should* be the results, you have to say that at this point in time, the trade is a win for Boston.

 

Just like if you're going to evaluate Reddick - Bailey on what has actually happened on the field this season, obviously you give the win to Reddick. But if you go based on how good a player each guy is, Bailey has been by FAR a better player than Reddick up to the start of this season. By a MILE.

 

In Reddick's three seasons (albeit in limited playing time) leading up to 2012 he contributed +1.4 wins above replacement. In Bailey's three seasons leading up to 2012 he contributed +6.2 wins above replacement. Bailey was one of the best relief pitchers in baseball for three years running....Reddick was a minor leaguer who never hit more than 7 homers in a major league season up to that point.

 

Not saying that Reddick didn't have talent, but if you go by what they had done in the majors up to that point, it's a no-brainer - Bailey destroyed Reddick.

 

But - and here is my point, obviously - if you go by their actual performance on the field since the trade, of course he's outperformed Bailey, who hasn't even played an inning yet for the Red Sox.

 

So are you going to be consistent? Are you going to hold each trade to the same standard and apply the same rubric for your evaluation? I didn't think a whole lot of Mortensen before the trade but the fact of the matter is, the dude has pitched extremely well for the Red Sox when given the chance. I don't care if he's done it with spitballs, gyroballs, sub-60 mph "fast"balls, whatever. He's been tremendous. He's been better than Scutaro has, period. No amount of mental gymnastics can demonstrate otherwise.

Here's my last statement on this. Scutaro still has more market value than Mortensen. It was a salary dump. Mortensen has done better than expected. He is not a prospect. He has no future. Once his options expire, he will be worthless to the Red Sox and probably every other team. Am I allowed to disagree with you about this trade? I think I am. All trades are not held to the same standard. There are different dynamics involved in every move. They affect who you keep, and how those players perform is relevant. A trade may be a good trade straight up in a vacuum, but if it doesn't address the needs of the team, that affects the judgment of the trade. So, correct, there is not a single standard by which to judge a trade, and often there is not a definitive verdict on a trade. I disagree with you on this. Let it go.

[Orange Juiced]

Here's my last statement on this. Scutaro still has more market value than Mortensen. It was a slary dump. Mortensen has done better than expected. He is not a prospect. He has no future. Once his options expire' date=' he will be worthless to the Red Sox and probably every other team. Am I allowed to disagree with you about this trade? I think I am. All trades are not held to the same standard. There are different dynamics involved in every move. They affect who you keep, and how those players perform is relevant. A trade may be a good trade straight up in a vacuum, but if it doesn't address the needs of the team, that affects the judgment of the trade. So, correct, there is not a single standard by which to judge a trade, and often there is not a definitive verdict on a trade. I disagree with you on this. Let it go.[/quote']

 

Ok, you're the boss.

[Palodios]

Here's my last statement on this. Scutaro still has more market value than Mortensen. It was a salary dump. Mortensen has done better than expected. He is not a prospect. He has no future. Once his options expire' date=' he will be worthless to the Red Sox and probably every other team. Am I allowed to disagree with you about this trade? I think I am. All trades are not held to the same standard. There are different dynamics involved in every move. They affect who you keep, and how those players perform is relevant. A trade may be a good trade straight up in a vacuum, but if it doesn't address the needs of the team, that affects the judgment of the trade. So, correct, there is not a single standard by which to judge a trade, and often there is not a definitive verdict on a trade. I disagree with you on this. Let it go.[/quote']

 

Mortensen was a first round draft pick by the Cardinals, who have drafted pitching very well over the past few years. Based on that he clearly must have talent, and he's done very well in the majors. Besides his low 90s fastball, I'm really not sure what you have to complain about.

[a700hitter]

Mortensen was a first round draft pick by the Cardinals' date=' who have drafted pitching very well over the past few years. Based on that he clearly must have talent, and he's done very well in the majors. Besides his low 90s fastball, I'm really not sure what you have to complain about.[/quote']Oh yes, every Cardinal drafted pitcher is Bob Gibson. I'm not complaining about him, just correctly characterizing him as a bush leaguer. He's 27 and hasn't spent an entire season at the big league level. That's a bush leaguer.