Red Sox and Pirates have discussed Hanrahan

[SoxFanForsyth]

I agree with this. I don't really think anyone has a case with it being anything but a salary dump. Punto was a throw-in. Gonzalez, Beckett, and Crawford had contracts that totaled 364 million over the life of those contracts. Obviously all of that money was not owed to them because of years and time already played, but those are still very large contracts, which is the reason why it is considered a salary dump. We did get some decent prospects in return, but to argue anything other than the fact that we dumped a lot of salary is far from the truth. That was the main reason.

 

We lost a three time All-Star and two time top 10 Cy Young candidate in Beckett, we lost a four time All-Star and three time Gold Glove winner in Gonzalez, and a four time All-Star and one time Gold Glove winner in Crawford. Obviously there were power concerns with Gonzalez, under performance and health concerns with Crawford, and clubhouse and under performance concerns with Beckett. But, that is still a lot to replace. We did not trade away those guys because we were blown away by a trade from the Dodgers. We won the trade in terms of getting rid of a bunch of salary and still receiving prospects like Webster and De La Rosa. The Dodgers won that trade by present value impact players. A change of scenery will be good for those guys. The Dodgers got a 2.93 ERA from Beckett in seven starts. Gonzalez is a Gold Glove caliber 1B with a decent bat for them. They will be getting a healthy Crawford when he comes back. That in itself is enough to say that this was a salary dump. If we did it solely based on fairness of trade value without any financial impact, then we lost this trade.

 

It is only fair to say this was a salary dump. This was a big thing for us in financial flexibility. We were able to go out and sign Uehara, trade for Hanrahan, sign Napoli (assuming that we officially sign him), sign Victorino, sign Gomes, sign Drew, and sign Ross because of the financial flexibility that this trade gave us. We would not be able to make all of those signings without this trade. We might have been able to make the trade for Hanrahan, but DeJesus and Sands were both used in the trade for Hanrahan.

 

I know that you think that De La Rosa is going to be a reliever, but he still has potential to be a back-end of the rotation starter. I am not giving hope on that, but if anything, he still might be a decent reliever. Webster was the big prospect we got back. Even if projections have him as a middle to back-end of the rotation starter. I am sure plenty of people will be happy if he can become a reliable three or four starter. No one is expecting him to be an ace.

 

He's got potential to be an ace. Keith Law actually said in a recent interview w Speier that he is at worst a middle of the rotation pitcher, and if he can figure out his arm slot on his slider and just have an average slider, he is an ace.

 

I don't understand how people on this board don't understand what we've got with De La Roaa

[jung]

Well I think we might be overestimating how soon these guys will be ready to make more than minimal contributions in the near term.

 

I also think that the odds of success in the ML being what they are there may well be one diamond in the rough in the bunch we got back with the remainder sort of meh contributors all said and done. Even that ain't bad.

 

Our problem at this site is that regarding trades and prospects we tend to add 2+2 here and get 5 very often when in truth you are lucky to add 2+2 on young players and trade returns and get 4. By the time we are done, we have just about every guy "succeeding" and then we have the team succeeding based on these individual guys succeeding. In truth if you hit on half of these deals you are doing well.

[a700hitter]

He's got potential to be an ace. Keith Law actually said in a recent interview w Speier that he is at worst a middle of the rotation pitcher, and if he can figure out his arm slot on his slider and just have an average slider, he is an ace.

 

I don't understand how people on this board don't understand what we've got with De La Roaa

I hope that you are right. The Dodgers have not been known to trade away there best pitching prospects. Probably the most notable exception to this was Pedro who they never believed would be durable enough to be a starter. Usually, the dodgers pump up their prospects reputations and unload them to other teams where they fail. Hopefully, this is another Pedro case. The dodgers are due for a screw up. It's been almost 20'years since Pedro.

[a700hitter]

Well I think we might be overestimating how soon these guys will be ready to make more than minimal contributions in the near term.

 

I also think that the odds of success in the ML being what they are there may well be one diamond in the rough in the bunch we got back with the remainder sort of meh contributors all said and done. Even that ain't bad.

 

Our problem at this site is that regarding trades and prospects we tend to add 2+2 here and get 5 very often when in truth you are lucky to add 2+2 on young players and trade returns and get 4. By the time we are done, we have just about every guy "succeeding" and then we have the team succeeding based on these individual guys succeeding. In truth if you hit on half of these deals you are doing well.

Yep, I think any organization would be thrilled with a 50% success ratio.

[redsoxfan3]

He's got potential to be an ace. Keith Law actually said in a recent interview w Speier that he is at worst a middle of the rotation pitcher, and if he can figure out his arm slot on his slider and just have an average slider, he is an ace.

 

I don't understand how people on this board don't understand what we've got with De La Roaa

 

I would be thrilled if he could become an ace. I did read that he has the potential to be a number 3 starter. I would be happy if he is a solid #3. I did not see the interview about what Keith Law said. If that is true, then I hope that is accurate. Of course, he has a lot to prove if that is the case. I have read multiple scouting reports saying he has the potential to be a middle of the rotation guy, or with minimal improvement a late-inning reliever. Either way, if he turns into a solid set-up man or a solid #3, I think that will be a success. The ace would be awesome, though.

[Lucienbel]

He's got potential to be an ace. Keith Law actually said in a recent interview w Speier that he is at worst a middle of the rotation pitcher, and if he can figure out his arm slot on his slider and just have an average slider, he is an ace.

 

I don't understand how people on this board don't understand what we've got with De La Roaa

 

Looking at what Scout's have said about him I could see why people think he could end up being a top of the rotation guy. Everyone is already projecting very good things for him and he's still very young, so I don't see why not. With that said, he's still very young so we'll see what happens.

 

Either way, even a middle of the rotation guy would be a gift in this trade personally. I see it largely as a salary dump as well. De La Rosa did need to be part of that trade though..... You can't give up all of that for nothing.

[SoxSport]

The Red Sox got two of the three best minor league pitchers in the Dodger organization in that deal. The Dodgers were going in a different direction, and they needed stars right now. They have money to spend, and have to get TV ratings and season tickets. The Red Sox had a bunch of bloated contracts and underachieving players. Great deal for them. Maybe a good deal for LA, but Gonzalez may be damaged goods with that shoulder. We'll see.

[jacksonianmarch]

If Keith Law thinks he's an ace, then he'll likely never surface in the bigs again. That guy's endorsement is the kiss of death. De la Rosa looks like a closer to me. Webster looks like the middle of the rotation innings eater in this swap

[Dojji]

And if he is a closer, then hooray, because we need one, but I expect this team to at least try him in the rotation Papelbon style before settling him in as a late inning arm. They'd have a cause to be gunshy post-Bard, but nothing ventured, nothing gained.

[jacksonianmarch]

I agree. No reason for Rubby to be in the pen to start 2013. He stays a starter for half a season and either excels and ascends to the bigs or sucks and moves to the pen

[a700hitter]

The trade was a great move if we got no one in return. If either of the remaining 2 of the 5 bodies we received ever pitches an entire big league season, it will be icing on a very sweet cake. I would set the odds at 50/50 that either of them ever pitches a full season for the Sox as a starter.

[jacksonianmarch]

I agree with you there a700. I think they'll stick with Rubby until he flames out completely or hashes out a big league role just due to his ceiling. But Webster is one strong Matt Barnes stretch away from becoming trade bait.

[kapsis21]

my question is was Jerry Sands expendable. i thought he would mash 30HRs at Fenway with ease.. atleast thts what i thought when reading about him.. i know its too late.. but just curious

[jung]

That is a pretty good question kaps. Don't think he was exactly chop liver. However I think it is more a statement about having a very bad feeling about Bailey.

 

If you have Bailey and as a set up man and he goes down, it is surely not as visible and telling as having your closer go down.

 

Myself I don't believe in elite set up men and I don't believe in paying huge money for closers not named Mariano. Some very successful teams do not appear to be nearly as preoccupied with who closes as the Red Sox. I have come to decide that it is part and parcel of our overemphasis on the Yankees which I totally hate. We are not the Yankees....we will never be the Yankees and I don't want to be some northern version of the Yankees.

 

Your point is I believe that if we gave up a guy that really ends up lighting it up and got a closer in return, that likely would be kinda' upsetting. I absolutely agree on that score. It will just become another in a long list of recent Sox issues for me to slit my wrists over. "The trade" is about the only thing that keeps me from hunting for sharp implements as it is.

[wyo-sox]

my question is was Jerry Sands expendable. i thought he would mash 30HRs at Fenway with ease.. atleast thts what i thought when reading about him.. i know its too late.. but just curious

 

I was wondering the same thing. From what I read I could not understand why he never competed with Loney in L A . and why we did not really want to give him a shot at first this coming season. Like most things must be more to it than I see.

[a700hitter]

I was wondering the same thing. From what I read I could not understand why he never competed with Loney in L A . and why we did not really want to give him a shot at first this coming season. Like most things must be more to it than I see.

 

It speaks volumes that Sands could not wrestle the Dodger job from Loney.

[rjortiz]

It speaks volumes that Sands could not wrestle the Dodger job from Loney.

 

I agree 100%. Also, people need to realize that Sands was on the older side for the league and was hitting in a bandbox. His stats don't mean that much.

[Behindenemylines]

None of the players the Sox gave up in the trade were going to play major roles for them in 2013. Hopefully, Hanrahan has the success as closer in Boston that he did in Pittsburgh. He is an upgrade over Melcanon (only player in trade who had a major league role in 2012) in the bullpen so the trade inproves the bullpen without weakening any other part of the team.

[kapsis21]

That is a pretty good question kaps. Don't think he was exactly chop liver. However I think it is more a statement about having a very bad feeling about Bailey.

 

If you have Bailey and as a set up man and he goes down, it is surely not as visible and telling as having your closer go down.

 

Myself I don't believe in elite set up men and I don't believe in paying huge money for closers not named Mariano. Some very successful teams do not appear to be nearly as preoccupied with who closes as the Red Sox. I have come to decide that it is part and parcel of our overemphasis on the Yankees which I totally hate. We are not the Yankees....we will never be the Yankees and I don't want to be some northern version of the Yankees.

 

Your point is I believe that if we gave up a guy that really ends up lighting it up and got a closer in return, that likely would be kinda' upsetting. I absolutely agree on that score. It will just become another in a long list of recent Sox issues for me to slit my wrists over. "The trade" is about the only thing that keeps me from hunting for sharp implements as it is.

 

Hanrahan has proved in Pittsburgh he can pitch but to keep it at the same level in East coast is going to be a huge uphill battle for him...

Sands could have easily become the 1st basemen we are missing this year if Ross/Napoli/Lavarnway were going to do catching duties. it could have given us lot of options at 1st and catcher but defensively we would be and we are weak at 1st base.

 

I have not heard anything about Holt so not sure how to put this trade the only piece i will miss in this trade is Sands, if he figures it out that is.

rest were expendable.

 

I didnt think we were in need of a closer esp since we got Uehara.. i would have put him in the 9th inning role. i think he would have fit there perfect.

oh well I am not the Manager so all i can say is lets hope this turns out to be a good trade for us...

[kapsis21]

None of the players the Sox gave up in the trade were going to play major roles for them in 2013. Hopefully, Hanrahan has the success as closer in Boston that he did in Pittsburgh. He is an upgrade over Melcanon (only player in trade who had a major league role in 2012) in the bullpen so the trade inproves the bullpen without weakening any other part of the team.

 

thats a big if. but i am hoping the same too!!

[Lucienbel]

That is a pretty good question kaps. Don't think he was exactly chop liver. However I think it is more a statement about having a very bad feeling about Bailey.

 

If you have Bailey and as a set up man and he goes down, it is surely not as visible and telling as having your closer go down.

 

Myself I don't believe in elite set up men and I don't believe in paying huge money for closers not named Mariano. Some very successful teams do not appear to be nearly as preoccupied with who closes as the Red Sox. I have come to decide that it is part and parcel of our overemphasis on the Yankees which I totally hate. We are not the Yankees....we will never be the Yankees and I don't want to be some northern version of the Yankees.

 

Your point is I believe that if we gave up a guy that really ends up lighting it up and got a closer in return, that likely would be kinda' upsetting. I absolutely agree on that score. It will just become another in a long list of recent Sox issues for me to slit my wrists over. "The trade" is about the only thing that keeps me from hunting for sharp implements as it is.

 

I also don't believe in paying (money or prospects wise) a ton for set up or closers. We've certainly been burnt by it in the past enough where it's concerning every time we do do it. Watching Tampa and other teams always able to fill in these rolls year after year also makes me think it can be done that way. Lastly, I also hate this overemphasis of the Yankees and do not want to be like that either.

 

With all of that said, Hanrahan is someone I'm interested in. If he can solve those command problems I don't think any of us will be questioning this trade. Hanrahan is solid and has really good stuff. To me, this has much better potential than the Bailey trade right out of the gate. I assume they weren't interested in Sands for one reason or another or they would have held on to him.

 

I have a feeling this one may actually work out.

[beeee_c]

I like this trade, but if we really wanted to add a closer why not grab the one available via FA (Brian Wilson) and use this bunch of guys to acquire another piece that we can't get from the free agency pool?

[jung]

Well I think ending up with Uehara and Bailey and Hanrahan might suggest that the Sox think they really need to try to bolster the pen such that they have a set course for 7th, 8th and 9th innings. That would not suggest much confidence in the rotation which also makes some sense.

 

or....

 

 

they are planning to package up Bailey in some fashion and move him along.

[User Name]

Well I think ending up with Uehara and Bailey and Hanrahan might suggest that the Sox think they really need to try to bolster the pen such that they have a set course for 7th, 8th and 9th innings. That would not suggest much confidence in the rotation which also makes some sense.

 

or....

 

 

they are planning to package up Bailey in some fashion and move him along.

 

You're looking too much into it. Building a good bullpen is of extreme importance no matter the apparent strength or weakness of the rotation.

[Spitball]

Hanrahan's control and Bailey's health make both pitchers question marks. It is a good idea to hold onto both in case one falls back into old problems.

 

Actually, Hanrahan fell apart, like the entire Pirate team, in September. I like the trade. They gave up, at best, AAAA minor leaguers.

[a700hitter]

Hanrahan's control and Bailey's health make both pitchers question marks. It is a good idea to hold onto both in case one falls back into old problems.

 

Actually, Hanrahan fell apart, like the entire Pirate team, in September. I like the trade. They gave up, at best, AAAA minor leaguers.

 

I agree. One is the back up plan for the other. Either of these guys could blow up.

[seabeachfred]

I was wondering the same thing. From what I read I could not understand why he never competed with Loney in L A . and why we did not really want to give him a shot at first this coming season. Like most things must be more to it than I see.

 

Wyo, Sands didn't compete with Loney in LA because the Dodgers didn't want him to compete with him. For awhile Loney, a first round draft choice of the Bums, was treated as a sacred cow and he did do well at first for the team. As the seasons progressed he got worse and worse, yet the Dodgers kept hoping he would find himself again and was reluctant to get him out of the lineup. Sands, meanwhile, was jerked around by the Dodgers, shuffling between first and the outfield when he wasn't shuffling between Las Vegas and LA. If Sands is given a chance with te Pirates he will become a 25-35 home run hitter for them. Sands would have been much better for us than Mauro Gomez who I'm afraid will be deposited on first for us next year with disastrous results that will have a ripple effect throughout our lineup.

[jung]

Well to be honest I am not sure which I am more non-plused by, whether Sands is a bust or not.

 

If the Sox now have gotten Hanrahan so that they can really nail down a solid combination for the 7th, 8th and 9th innings, all things being equal that does not sound like a vote of confidence for the rotation to me.

 

If the got Hanrahan as protection for Bailey thinking that they are really protection for each other, that sounds sort of lame as well. Bailey appears to be able to sustain an injury walking to the water cooler. Not sure Hanrahan is that bad.

 

Maybe the real plan is to package Bailey up and send him on his way. That would at least be a vote of confidence for both the rotation and the pen.

[Spitball]

Well to be honest I am not sure which I am more non-plused by, whether Sands is a bust or not.

 

If the Sox now have gotten Hanrahan so that they can really nail down a solid combination for the 7th, 8th and 9th innings, all things being equal that does not sound like a vote of confidence for the rotation to me.

 

If the got Hanrahan as protection for Bailey thinking that they are really protection for each other, that sounds sort of lame as well. Bailey appears to be able to sustain an injury walking to the water cooler. Not sure Hanrahan is that bad.

 

Maybe the real plan is to package Bailey up and send him on his way. That would at least be a vote of confidence for both the rotation and the pen.

 

I can't imagine Bailey is at peak value right now. He probably has more value to Boston right now as a comebacvk candidate.

[Dojji]

Well to be honest I am not sure which I am more non-plused by, whether Sands is a bust or not.

 

If the Sox now have gotten Hanrahan so that they can really nail down a solid combination for the 7th, 8th and 9th innings, all things being equal that does not sound like a vote of confidence for the rotation to me.

 

If the got Hanrahan as protection for Bailey thinking that they are really protection for each other, that sounds sort of lame as well. Bailey appears to be able to sustain an injury walking to the water cooler. Not sure Hanrahan is that bad.

 

Maybe the real plan is to package Bailey up and send him on his way. That would at least be a vote of confidence for both the rotation and the pen.

 

I don't mean any personal offense to you, Jung, but maybe the real plan is not to be as blindingly stupid as they were last year by pencilling one and exactly one reliever into each role and saying "closer. Right. Got that one. Now on to set up. Melancon? Fine. Now, who's our middle relief?" With the result that Aceves wound up shoehorned into the closer's role because of inadequate planning and depth.

 

1 closer and 2 setup men is about right, and having 2 of those guys be steady durable arms doesn't hurt. If Bailey can contribute, great, if not, we're prepared to work around that with Hanrahan, Uehara and possibly Tazawa. And we have a couple guys below them not named Aceves, who could do in a pinch if called upon. Breslow has played some leverage relief before, and Miller and Morales (as well as Tazawa) are worth trying. And who knows? Bard may be a bit less dead than we think he is now.

 

The point is that they're thinking ahead and making sure we have options. Depth and resiliency. It's a good thing.