Missing Iggy pop?

[Spudboy]

I don't believe that their size (Petrocelli and Valentin) had anything to do with them moving to third. They might have been getting a little slower but basically as I recall two better shortstops just came along.

 

That IS what I remember.

[Dojji]

Valentin maybe, but not Petrocelli. Petrocelli got replaced at SS by 37 year old Luis Aparicio a quintessential McNoodlebat shortstop. He like Valentin was moved to third because they lost a step defensively, which is probably going to happen to X when he reaches the back 9. There will be plenty of time to line up a good replacement at SS before that happens though.

 

(speaking of which, holy hell was Petrocelli great when he was in his peak years, probably the best SS the Sox had until Nomah, I had no idea!).

[Spudboy]

You still have no idea. You were dead then and did not witness what actually happened.

Luis Apparicio was past his prime and suffered a terrible slump after coming to Boston. So much so that Nixon ( I believe ) sent him a Telegram of encouragement. Regardless, He remained a spectacular defensive SS and was recognized as one of the best in the AL. Perocelli's size had nothing to do with moving him to 3rd, as I recall. The Sox wanted Apparicio at SS.

 

Valentin was pretty good at SS as well. But there was a generational player knocking at the SS door. It made sense to move him to third.

[iortiz]

Can you back this claim up please? Last year according to most every stat Xander actually has the edge defensively and this year they are about equal.......... not sure where you get 'way better' from.........

 

Well, Iglesias' UZR/150 is 3 points higher in 2015.

 

... but let me put it this way and aside stats, if I had to defend my infield --and both healthy-, and if the decision were based only on their glove, I'd choose Iglesias over Xander any day of week.

[cp176]

You still have no idea. You were dead then and did not witness what actually happened.

Luis Apparicio was past his prime and suffered a terrible slump after coming to Boston. So much so that Nixon ( I believe ) sent him a Telegram of encouragement. Regardless, He remained a spectacular defensive SS and was recognized as one of the best in the AL. Perocelli's size had nothing to do with moving him to 3rd, as I recall. The Sox wanted Apparicio at SS.

 

Valentin was pretty good at SS as well. But there was a generational player knocking at the SS door. It made sense to move him to third.

 

I was there just like you were Spud. I am not going to take the time drinking around to find the specifics but wasn't Louis something like 0 for 43? maybe worse. i don't remember there ever being anyone who ever suggested that he wasn't still one of the best defensive ss in the game right up until the end. Much like the catching position, ss was always one of those positions that if you could find one who kid could hit just a little to go along with the fielding you were damn lucky. Players like Ernie Banks didn't come around everyday. I loved those white Sox teams of the late 50's - Nellie Fox at second and my favorite Louis Apparichio at short. Maybe I liked him so much because I could always pick em I just couldn't hit the goddam thing.

[mvp 78]

I was there just like you were Spud. I am not going to take the time drinking around to find the specifics but wasn't Louis something like 0 for 43? maybe worse. i don't remember there ever being anyone who ever suggested that he wasn't still one of the best defensive ss in the game right up until the end. Much like the catching position, ss was always one of those positions that if you could find one who kid could hit just a little to go along with the fielding you were damn lucky. Players like Ernie Banks didn't come around everyday. I loved those white Sox teams of the late 50's - Nellie Fox at second and my favorite Louis Apparichio at short. Maybe I liked him so much because I could always pick em I just couldn't hit the goddam thing.

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/gl.cgi?id=aparilu01&t=b&year=1971

 

It looks like he went 0 for 47 at the end of May the first year he was here. Still was an AS though.

[cp176]

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/gl.cgi?id=aparilu01&t=b&year=1971

 

It looks like he went 0 for 47 at the end of May the first year he was here. Still was an AS though.

 

thanks for that. I was pretty sure that it was 0 for 40ish. Still a very vivid memory for me. I think that he was on a couple of All-Star teams while with the Sox. Louis could run pretty much right up to the end as well. Obviously only the old guys here remember those teams of the late 60's and early 70's but they were good.

[Spudboy]

I did not intend to attack Dojji at all. He usually says good stuff.

 

I just recall things very differently from what he presented and I made no effort to look things up on the net.

 

I though Apparicio went 0-52 but again this is just from memory only.

 

In any case, he was much better defensively than any of the other guys mentioned including probably Jose.

[Maxbialystock]

Back to Iglesias. I didn't just like him for what he did for the team, I thought and still think that great defense is the poetry of MLB--whereas pitching and batting tend to be the prose. All that said, the rationale for letting him go in August 2013 was good--the Sox already had Drew starting and Bogaerts backing him up. If getting another starter would help get to the playoffs and beyond, so be it. Last year and this year, WAR-wise, Bogaerts had been near the top of AL shortstops. Others have argued we should have kept Bogaerts and Iglesias for 3B and SS in the future. Perhaps. But I like Bogaerts at SS right now.

[cp176]

I love the game but I do think that I loved it a little more back then. Apparicio is in the HOF because he was that good. No one has mentioned him but how good was Burleson back in the day. It almost drove me to the dark side when they let Fisk, lynn, and the Rooster walk.(not really but I wasn't very happy). i also absolutely believe that Lynn would have had a HOF career if he had stayed in Boston. come to think of it, remembering these teams - we have had some absolutely great baseball talent in Boston throughout the years.

[Slasher9]

I was fine when we traded Iggy for pitching in the stretch run of a WS winning season. Pitching = parades.

the debate on the former forum was that we could have kept iggy and moved X-Bo to 3rd and locked down the left side for a decade. well, X-Bo has taken yuuuge strides defensively and a guy named travis is putting his stamp on 3b. the left side could very well be locked up for the next decade. and IMO will be a superior left side to X-Bo-Iggy........

[Kimmi]

The bottom line is that the FO felt that Iglesias was dispensable. They did not see him as a starter in their long term plans.

 

I much prefer a defense over offense at SS, but I was okay with the trade because of the depth that we had.

 

Truth be told, Bogaerts has made me forget about Iglesias.

[S5Dewey]

Yeah, ok, I'll chime in on this topic, but first let me say that I like this team as it sits now.

 

However, I hated that trade when it was made and I hate it now. One simply does not trade the shortstop runner-up ROY for a pitcher who's on the verge of aging out of baseball. I also fault the FO for not recognizing the ability Iggy has and deciding that he wasn't in the team's future. That trade is at the beginning of the path that "forced" the FO to sign Sandoval, spending money that could/should have been spent on pitching.

 

The FO was very fortunate in what happened after that trade when the Sox won the WS because once you get to the playoffs "anything can happen" - and often does. Winning the WS made everything they did that year right. [obviously a little poetic license there]. They also were very fortunate that Travis Shaw progressed the way he did and is able to fill the 3B slot now because there's no such thing as a sure thing prospect and Shaw was barely on the radar at that time.

 

Had the Sox not won the WS in 2013 and Shaw not become what he is today - and both of those were a distinct possibility - that trade wouldn't look nearly as good as it does now and we'd be bemoaning losing a GG caliber player.

[Kimmi]

Yeah, ok, I'll chime in on this topic, but first let me say that I like this team as it sits now.

 

However, I hated that trade when it was made and I hate it now. One simply does not trade the shortstop runner-up ROY for a pitcher who's on the verge of aging out of baseball. I also fault the FO for not recognizing the ability Iggy has and deciding that he wasn't in the team's future. That trade is at the beginning of the path that "forced" the FO to sign Sandoval, spending money that could/should have been spent on pitching.

 

The FO was very fortunate in what happened after that trade when the Sox won the WS because once you get to the playoffs "anything can happen" - and often does. Winning the WS made everything they did that year right. [obviously a little poetic license there]. They also were very fortunate that Travis Shaw progressed the way he did and is able to fill the 3B slot now because there's no such thing as a sure thing prospect and Shaw was barely on the radar at that time.

 

Had the Sox not won the WS in 2013 and Shaw not become what he is today - and both of those were a distinct possibility - that trade wouldn't look nearly as good as it does now and we'd be bemoaning losing a GG caliber player.

 

I was waiting for you to chime in on this because I remember how against this trade you were. I disagree with you on this, but I understand where you're coming from. Again, I think what made the deal possible was the depth the team felt they had at SS and 3B at the time the trade was made.

 

I think you also have to factor in the vote of confidence this trade must have given the team. That effect is something that can't be measured, but when the FO is willing to "go for it" at the trade deadline, it sends a strong message to the team.

[S5Dewey]

IMHO it was a dreadful, dreadful trade.

 

Dreadful not only in trading him away, but also that we didn't get more for him!

[Bellhorn04]

The Dead Horse thread is the perfect place for things like rehashes of the Iggy trade.

[redsoxdirtdog]

I don't believe that their size (Petrocelli and Valentin) had anything to do with them moving to third. They might have been getting a little slower but basically as I recall two better shortstops just came along.

 

Now I do agree with this. I would have dealt him eventually, BUT for a big time #1-2 SR pitcher or other.

 

WE SOLD WAY LOW!!!!

[redsoxdirtdog]

IMHO it was a dreadful, dreadful trade.

 

Dreadful not only in trading him away, but also that we didn't get more for him!

 

Ughhh. Sorry s5!

 

THIS is what I agree with!

[Bellhorn04]

Yes, well, Billy Beane didn't get much for Josh Donaldson either. And Donaldson is a game-changing MVP.

[Bellhorn04]

Teams will give up a lot in deadline deals when they think have a legit shot. Baltimore gave us E-Rod for a few months of Andrew Miller. There are worse deadline tradeoffs than Iggy all the time.

[Kingface]

Well, Iglesias' UZR/150 is 3 points higher in 2015.

 

... but let me put it this way and aside stats, if I had to defend my infield --and both healthy-, and if the decision were based only on their glove, I'd choose Iglesias over Xander any day of week.

 

........And my team would beat your team all day every day.........

[Kimmi]

Read a tweet today about Iglesias' Defensive Runs Saved since being traded is -3.

[southpaw777]

Iggy isnt as good as some here think IMHO.

I factor in everything. Attitude is big, and Iggys attidude has been questioned since he came to Boston and since hes left here.

His defense is great, albeit too showboaty for me. Dumb errors showing off.

He has had leg issues while in Boston as well. Maybe that was a factor in him being traded as well.

Xander is a Derek Jeter type IMHO. This kid is a perrenial all star. A leader..His defense is GG calibur, and like Drew was, Xander is sure handed. Something I choose over a show boat. Hes a 300 hitter who should develop 15-20 hr potential. Even if its less, hes one of the best SS in the game right now.

The move to trade Iggy showed the team that ownership was in it to win it.

They had lots of depth on the left side at the time.

No, it didnt "force" anyone to pick up Pablo. It was a choice. Thats just a ridiculous thought.

To think that this trade has done any harm to the Sox future is just sour apples that Iggy was even traded.

It was a smart baseball move by ownership/FO.

[redsoxdirtdog]

The Dead Horse thread is the perfect place for things like rehashes of the Iggy trade.

 

 

No offense, but how the hell would this thread be better in the ridiculously scattered "dead horse" thread? If there is no interest in rehashing the Iggy vs. X-Bo debate, which seems incredibly relevant now that X-Bo is turning into a bona fide' All-Star in front if our very eyes, then the thread will run it's course v e ry quickly & fall off the sacrosanct front board. IDK..., Many seem a bit tightly wound around here by the "code of conduct?" Forgive me, but it seems that some have their panties in a bunch because a few refugees have come in and their threads are getting attention... i.e. traffic. Maybe it's more important to direct traffic than generating it?

 

Shyte gets absolutely lost & buried in that dead "dead horse" thread. Have you guys not heard the saying about beating a dead horse?

 

Hope it's ok to mix it up just a little. I rarely start a threat, but perhaps space is reserved for the more.... "Proper Bostonian?"

[S5Dewey]

As I understand it, RSDD, we can start threads about Bogaerts and how good he is but we can't start any threads about the fact that he's better than Iggy.

 

Anyway, my new attitude is that I'm not starting any more threads. I'll just leave that up to the people whose sandbox I invaded and comment on those threads until I get all the rules straight.