2016-2017 Offseason Trade Speculation Thread

[Bellhorn04]

The thing that the Iggy mourners are in denial about is that he just isn't that good. He has a 5.6 WAR in 401 games. By comparison, Brock Holt has a 5.3 WAR in 379 games. Almost identical values.

[S5Dewey]

The thing that the Iggy mourners are in denial about is that he just isn't that good. He has a 5.6 WAR in 401 games. By comparison, Brock Holt has a 5.3 WAR in 379 games. Almost identical values.

 

Maybe it's things like this that make me not have a lot of faith in WAR. Are you trying to tell me that Brock Holt should be the starting SS for a pretty darn good MLB team? If so, we need to trade him for a starting pitcher, and do it NOW!

[Bellhorn04]

Maybe it's things like this that make me not have a lot of faith in WAR. Are you trying to tell me that Brock Holt should be the starting SS for a pretty darn good MLB team? If so, we need to trade him for a starting pitcher, and do it NOW!

 

What I'm telling you is that IGGY ISN'T THAT GOOD.

 

I know that when you think of Iggy you see nothing but spectacular inning-ending plays, but his very modest WAR numbers reflect the hard cold realities of his overall contributions. Sorry.

[moonslav59]

Yes, he did have a Sandy Leon run. When Leon was en fuego this year it was very reminiscent of Iggy's run. One of those freakish streaks in baseball that has to be enjoyed while it lasts like a shooting star.

 

Iggy has a .274 BA with the Tigers in over 3 times the PAs as he had with Boston (where he had a .280 BA).

 

Let's be truthful here, 90% of Sox fans would have been screaming for Iggy to be our long term SS had I guaranteed he'd hit .275.

 

I get that his OPS is just .678, but only 16 MLB SSs have more PAs and a better OPS as a SS than Iggy, so one could argue, he's been about average on offense for a SS (maybe slightly below) and top 5-6 on defense. That's a plus all around no matter how you spin it, except for one thing: durability and health.

[Bellhorn04]

Iggy has a .274 BA with the Tigers in over 3 times the PAs as he had with Boston (where he had a .280 BA).

 

Let's be truthful here, 90% of Sox fans would have been screaming for Iggy to be our long term SS had I guaranteed he'd hit .275.

 

I get that his OPS is just .678, but only 16 MLB SSs have more PAs and a better OPS as a SS than Iggy, so one could argue, he's been about average on offense for a SS (maybe slightly below) and top 5-6 on defense. That's a plus all around no matter how you spin it, except for one thing: durability and health.

 

I'm not spinning anything. I'm not the one who calculates WAR. And yes, his health and durability are significant issues.

[S5Dewey]

What I'm telling you is that IGGY ISN'T THAT GOOD.

 

I know that when you think of Iggy you see nothing but spectacular inning-ending plays, but his very modest WAR numbers reflect the hard cold realities of his overall contributions. Sorry.

 

So in WAR Brock Holt = Iggy. This is one of those situations where a player's ability doesn't correspond well with WAR, which is why I have little faith in WAR.

 

Let's look at their stats.

Iggy .275/.678 BA/OPS

Holt .273/.705

 

They're essentially the same with Holt having slightly more power. I can agree with that.

 

However, in order for the two of them to be equal one would have to think that Iggy is only slightly better than Holt defensively. Really?

 

I will give you this, though. Brock Holt for Jake Peavey would have been a fairer trade.

[moonslav59]

I'm not spinning anything. I'm not the one who calculates WAR. And yes, his health and durability are significant issues.

 

His loss of playing time is a huge factor in his WAR. I'm not downplaying the importance of being able to play.The fact that he hasn't played more than 137 games in the two years after his missed season shows there may be issues beyond one "freak" injury. I totally get that.

 

However, when you look at his numbers when he plays, he's clearly better than average and probably places top 10 of 30 overall. In my opinion, he's still a better option (when healthy) than what we have at 3B now, assuming the move of Bogey to 3B.

 

I do think the comparison to Leon as a shooting star was kind of a "spin", since Iggy's .274 Detroit BA has been much higher than most expected... certainly not .330, but clearly not as low as projected.

[moonslav59]

So in WAR Brock Holt = Iggy. This is one of those situations where a player's ability doesn't correspond well with WAR, which is why I have little faith in WAR.

 

Let's look at their stats.

Iggy .275/.678 BA/OPS

Holt .273/.705

 

They're essentially the same with Holt having slightly more power. I can agree with that.

 

However, in order for the two of them to be equal one would have to think that Iggy is only slightly better than Holt defensively. Really?

 

I will give you this, though. Brock Holt for Jake Peavey would have been a fairer trade.

 

Holt's WAR is not based on playing SS, although his UZR/150 in just 212 innings there is freakishly good. He has a -3 DRS in 212 innings, which is freakishly horrible.

[S5Dewey]

I'm not spinning anything. I'm not the one who calculates WAR. And yes, his health and durability are significant issues.

 

No they're not. Not in the bigger picture. Iggy had one serious injury which kept him out of the 2014 season, which gives people that impression. Iggy and Hanley have something in common: They both had serious injuries and tried to play through them. In Hanley's case he stunk up the field and in Iggy's case he spent the time on the DL.

 

Other than that he lost what was supposed to be two weeks when he got a broken finger by getting hit with a pitch at the end of 2015. Then "with the Tigers later falling out of the AL Central race, the team elected to not activate him from the DL for the remainder of the season". (Wiki)

[Bellhorn04]

So in WAR Brock Holt = Iggy. This is one of those situations where a player's ability doesn't correspond well with WAR, which is why I have little faith in WAR.

 

Let's look at their stats.

Iggy .275/.678 BA/OPS

Holt .273/.705

 

They're essentially the same with Holt having slightly more power. I can agree with that.

 

However, in order for the two of them to be equal one would have to think that Iggy is only slightly better than Holt defensively. Really?

 

I will give you this, though. Brock Holt for Jake Peavey would have been a fairer trade.

 

Let me make one thing clear. We didn't get equal value on the trade. It was a classic deadline deal. And it did make me nervous at the time. But IMO, Iggy has turned out to be not as good as some of the early prognostications suggested.

[Bellhorn04]

And another thing: playing the 'Well, I think we probably could have won the World Series without Peavy' card is pretty bad. Nobody will every know that, but Peavy was a good solid #3 which we needed badly with Buchholz on the shelf. Peavy took the ball every 5 days, averaged 6.4 innings per start, which was good for the bullpen, and posted a 102 ERA+ like a #3 is supposed to do. He was also reportedly a good clubhouse presence.

 

It was exactly the move that we didn't make in 2011, and probably cost us the playoffs that year.

[Eddy Ballgame]

His loss of playing time is a huge factor in his WAR. I'm not downplaying the importance of being able to play.The fact that he hasn't played more than 137 games in the two years after his missed season shows there may be issues beyond one "freak" injury. I totally get that.

 

However, when you look at his numbers when he plays, he's clearly better than average and probably places top 10 of 30 overall. In my opinion, he's still a better option (when healthy) than what we have at 3B now, assuming the move of Bogey to 3B.

 

I do think the comparison to Leon as a shooting star was kind of a "spin", since Iggy's .274 Detroit BA has been much higher than most expected... certainly not .330, but clearly not as low as projected.

 

"Assuming the move of Bogaerts to 3rd." Pretty big assumption considering the fact that Bogaerts said that he didn't want to play 3rd, but because you seem to base everything on "statistics" and completely ignore the human element of baseball, sticking Bogaerts at 3rd works in your world.

 

The whole problem with your "stat based" argument for Iglesias is that it ignores several real factors as to why they traded him and didn't consider him to be a part of the future. His attitude, his medical reports, his focus (one scout wrote in a report that "Iglesias often loses concentration"...Google it), his power & they felt Bogaerts was a better option. These issues are very real and factors as to why they traded him. I wonder if the reason why he's such a terrible base stealer has to do with his issues with being able to focus? You can keep talking about his .275 batting average, although it was nowhere near that this year, but it has little to do with why he's not here.

 

Again, it's so strange to be having this "argument." All over New England it's "Jose who?" yet S5 can't post something on here without bringing up his love for Iglesias. By the way, Iglesias had a pretty bad year this year. I would't be surprised at all if he's not the "starting SS for a pretty good team" next year.

[Eddy Ballgame]

No they're not. Not in the bigger picture. Iggy had one serious injury which kept him out of the 2014 season, which gives people that impression. Iggy and Hanley have something in common: They both had serious injuries and tried to play through them. In Hanley's case he stunk up the field and in Iggy's case he spent the time on the DL.

 

Other than that he lost what was supposed to be two weeks when he got a broken finger by getting hit with a pitch at the end of 2015. Then "with the Tigers later falling out of the AL Central race, the team elected to not activate him from the DL for the remainder of the season". (Wiki)

 

http://www.freep.com/story/sports/mlb/tigers/2016/08/25/detroit-tigers-jose-iglesias/89340886/

 

- Now there's a manager who seems to have a lot of confidence in his starting SS returning from the DL! Lol...

[Bellhorn04]

http://www.freep.com/story/sports/mlb/tigers/2016/08/25/detroit-tigers-jose-iglesias/89340886/

 

- Now there's a manager who seems to have a lot of confidence in his starting SS returning from the DL! Lol...

 

Yeah, it sounds like Ausmus is really in love with Iggy, doesn't it?

[FredLynn]

So in WAR Brock Holt = Iggy. This is one of those situations where a player's ability doesn't correspond well with WAR, which is why I have little faith in WAR.

 

Let's look at their stats.

Iggy .275/.678 BA/OPS

Holt .273/.705

 

They're essentially the same with Holt having slightly more power. I can agree with that.

 

However, in order for the two of them to be equal one would have to think that Iggy is only slightly better than Holt defensively. Really?

 

I will give you this, though. Brock Holt for Jake Peavey would have been a fairer trade.

 

I would rather have Holt on my 25 man roster than Iggy because of the flexibility he provides. Iggy is a SS; Holt is passable utility player with similar WAR value.

[S5Dewey]

And another thing: playing the 'Well, I think we probably could have won the World Series without Peavy' card is pretty bad. Nobody will every know that, but Peavy was a good solid #3 which we needed badly with Buchholz on the shelf. Peavy took the ball every 5 days, averaged 6.4 innings per start, which was good for the bullpen, and posted a 102 ERA+ like a #3 is supposed to do. He was also reportedly a good clubhouse presence.

 

It was exactly the move that we didn't make in 2011, and probably cost us the playoffs that year.

 

One of the things that rankles me is half of a story. Peavy's numbers look good until you realize who he pitched against.

 

In 10 starts he had four wins for the Sox, only one of them against a team with a winning record (the Dodgers). Other than that his wins were against the White Sox (78-84), the Colorado Rockies (75-87) and the hapless Diamondbacks (63-93). The league is full of pitchers who could have beaten those guys.

 

Whether we "needed him" is a whole 'nother story with Dubront (11-6, 4.32) and Workman (6-3, 4.97) available, but I'll defer to the Sox in thinking that we "needed" another pitcher. What they did was pay a Mercedes price for someone who used to be a Cadillac pitcher when they could have been as successful with a Chevrolet, and cheaper.

 

Bad idea. Bad, bad idea.

 

As I've said, I can willingly live with Mistake #1 - not having Iggy in their plans, but they NEVER should have traded him and gotten such poor value for him.

[moonslav59]

"Assuming the move of Bogaerts to 3rd." Pretty big assumption considering the fact that Bogaerts said that he didn't want to play 3rd, but because you seem to base everything on "statistics" and completely ignore the human element of baseball, sticking Bogaerts at 3rd works in your world.

 

The whole problem with your "stat based" argument for Iglesias is that it ignores several real factors as to why they traded him and didn't consider him to be a part of the future. His attitude, his medical reports, his focus (one scout wrote in a report that "Iglesias often loses concentration"...Google it), his power & they felt Bogaerts was a better option. These issues are very real and factors as to why they traded him. I wonder if the reason why he's such a terrible base stealer has to do with his issues with being able to focus? You can keep talking about his .275 batting average, although it was nowhere near that this year, but it has little to do with why he's not here.

 

Again, it's so strange to be having this "argument." All over New England it's "Jose who?" yet S5 can't post something on here without bringing up his love for Iglesias. By the way, Iglesias had a pretty bad year this year. I would't be surprised at all if he's not the "starting SS for a pretty good team" next year.

 

I know all about the "attitude" issues with Iggy.

 

I'm not "all about stats", because most stats show Iggy is not an overall plus at SS, so I think you're wrong on that aspect.

 

I know Bogey said he didn't want to play 3B.

 

I also know he's not getting better on defense at SS since the Iggy trade was made. Not by stats and metrics, which do support my position, but from my observations based on watching just about every single pitch in every single Sox game in every single season since the 1980's.

 

Bogey's not a plus defender at SS. I admit I have an obsession with great SS fielding that has never been based on stats. It's based on me playing the game for many years and seeing tremendous SS defense, particularly with superior range, have enormous value on a team's psyche and run differential.

 

I'm fine with people arguing about Iggy's injuries and attitude. There's some good points made, and to me, this isn't a clear right vs wrong debate. There's too many nuances involved for anything to be clear about what side is right here. I get your side. I have even said many times that given the fact that Sox management likely never viewed Iggy as the FT SS, then the trade made perfect sense. In their eyes, they traded a uttility IF'er for 1.3 years of a solid SP'er. Makes total sense to me.

 

What I'm arguing is that I did view Iggy as our FT SS of the future (at a low cost, I might add). At the time of the trade and before, many scouts were saying or hinting at the fact that Bogey might not be cut out to play SS as he matured. The fact that he has not improved seems to back up that aspect of my position that he should have been groomed to play 3B or both 3B and SS earlier in his career. I mean fo God's saake, they threw him into a new position right smack in the middle of a pennant race and post season after playing just 10 games at 3B in AAA. I don't blame the guy for saying, "I'd rather play SS." Plus, most SSs love the feeling of playing the most important defensive position on the diamond (next to maybe catcher). Not many enjoy giving it up, but countless SSs have. MLB is littered with former SSs doing very well at different positions.

 

I thought I saw a little improvement last year on defense with Bogey. I easily admitted that maybe I was wrong all along about his defensive abilities at SS. On another site, I even said that if he keeps improving, I'll admit I was wrong on the Iggy/Montas-Peavy trade. That hasn't happened. Bogey took a step backwards while Iggy has his .275 with the Tigers.

 

I'm not sure why this trade seems to be debated more than the AGon-Rizzo trade, more than the Dodger salary dump trade, and more than the great Sox Purge of 2014, because I don't think anything that major changed. I don't think we won in 2013 because of Peavy, but I also don't think we'd be all that much better without making the trade. Better, yes, but not by a lot. Now, if we can argue we don't sign Pablo, if we have Iggy, then things look different, but there are "what ifs" on both sides, so I'm willing to just leave it at me feeling the trade was bad, but understandable. The trade was not so bad as to make a huge impact on our team since the WS win in 2013. I know S5Dewey may think differently, and I respect him for that, but I'm kinds feeling like this dead horse has been beaten enough.

 

Edited October 22, 2016 by moonslav59

[Spudboy]

I'm with Dewey on this.

[S5Dewey]

 

Again, it's so strange to be having this "argument." All over New England it's "Jose who?" yet S5 can't post something on here without bringing up his love for Iglesias. By the way, Iglesias had a pretty bad year this year. I would't be surprised at all if he's not the "starting SS for a pretty good team" next year.

 

Really? Since my name was brought up and it became personal I'll defend myself.

 

Apparently you need to be reading more of my posts. The ONLY time I mention Iggy and that trade is when someone else brings it up but if someone else brings it up I will respond. Depend on it. Doubt it? Check it out. Then get back to me and tell me how many times since I came to this forum that I've initiated any conversations about that trade.

 

I understand that there are some people who will carry water for the FO regardless of what they do. I'm just not one of them.

[Spudboy]

Really? Since my name was brought up and it became personal I'll defend myself.

 

Apparently you need to be reading more of my posts. The ONLY time I mention Iggy and that trade is when someone else brings it up but if someone else brings it up I will respond. Depend on it. Doubt it? Check it out. Then get back to me and tell me how many times since I came to this forum that I've initiated any conversations about that trade.

 

I understand that there are some people who will carry water for the FO regardless of what they do. I'm just not one of them.

 

I don't remember you mentioning Iggy at all. And I love the bolded line. Lol.

[Bellhorn04]

One of the things that rankles me is half of a story. Peavy's numbers look good until you realize who he pitched against.

 

In 10 starts he had four wins for the Sox, only one of them against a team with a winning record (the Dodgers). Other than that his wins were against the White Sox (78-84), the Colorado Rockies (75-87) and the hapless Diamondbacks (63-93). The league is full of pitchers who could have beaten those guys.

 

Whether we "needed him" is a whole 'nother story with Dubront (11-6, 4.32) and Workman (6-3, 4.97) available, but I'll defer to the Sox in thinking that we "needed" another pitcher. What they did was pay a Mercedes price for someone who used to be a Cadillac pitcher when they could have been as successful with a Chevrolet, and cheaper.

 

Bad idea. Bad, bad idea.

 

As I've said, I can willingly live with Mistake #1 - not having Iggy in their plans, but they NEVER should have traded him and gotten such poor value for him.

 

Peavy also had Quality Starts against Toronto, Tampa and Baltimore that didn't result in wins. He didn't have one start less than 5 innings.

 

Iggy was a 'Mercedes price'? Now that's just hopelessly delusional.

[moonslav59]

One of the things that rankles me is half of a story....

 

As I've said, I can willingly live with Mistake #1 - not having Iggy in their plans, but they NEVER should have traded him and gotten such poor value for him.

 

I actually have the opposite view. I have more of a beef with their valuation of Iggy that with what they got back for him.

 

The cost of a pitcher like Peavy at a trade deadline is usually enormous. Although he clearly was not a "Mercedes" anymore, he had 1.3 years of team control and we were looking to compete in 2014 as well. One could argue they valued Iggy highly, since they got something like Peavy back for him, but we also gave up Montas. If peavy had pitched better for us, then the trade might not look as bad, but I think he actually underperformed expectations. That's a hindsight aspect to viewing the trade though, just as talking about Iggy's injuries and better than expected hitting is.

 

To me, the bigger mistake was not wanting Iggy to be our FT SS into the future. He was arb eligible until 2016 or 2017, so (3-4 more years not counting the remainder of 2013. I think his lost season has made him arb eligible to 2018.

 

I can see why the liked Bogey as their SS of the future, but then the whole Stephen Drew fiasco kind of showed they, themselves, felt Bogey wasn't "the man" yet. Keeping Iggy at least until the end of 2014 would have saved us the Drew issue.

 

I'm okay with the decision they made. Whether it was attitude issues, projected low offense or both, Sox management did not view Iggy as their FT SS. The fact that they played Iggy at 3B for 37 games in 2013 (which shocked the s*** out of me) told the whole story. To move a great defender at SS to 3B so Drew or Bogey could play SS was absurd, IMO. It showed how they viewed Iggy as a utility IF'er and not the extreme plus defender at SS that was his calling card and highest portion of his value.

 

Detroit moved Perralta, when he came back- not Iggy, and Perralta was a better fielder than Drew/Bogey, so to me it was obvious there was a valuation difference between the Sox and Detroit.

 

[Eddy Ballgame]

Moon mentions that "Bogaerts took a step back this year, while Iglesias has hit .275 in Detroit." Wow. Iglesias hit 45 points lower this year (.255) than he did last year (.300), but that's not a "step back?!?!" Come on. At least argue apples to apples.

 

Now we have S5 reaching new levels of man crush by calling Iglesias a "Mercedes." Wow. The guy hit .245 this year.

 

I'm guessing S5 didn't read the article that I posted above where Ausmus makes it sound like he'd rather start Eric freaking Aybar over Iglesias when he returned from the DL. I love a good debate over a trade, but when you have a guy who is so blinded by one side of the argument, this is what happens. I don't know one single Sox fan personally who regrets that trade, or ever even mentions it, yet S5 makes it sound like it's Cater/Lyle or Bagwell/Anderson.

 

Thanks for the memories, Iglesias, and thank you for that crucial error that was such an integral part of another Sox World Series Championship.

Edited October 22, 2016 by Eddy Ballgame

[Bellhorn04]

http://www.freep.com/story/sports/mlb/tigers/2016/08/25/detroit-tigers-jose-iglesias/89340886/

 

- Now there's a manager who seems to have a lot of confidence in his starting SS returning from the DL! Lol...

 

I hope the Iggy fans read this and have a response for it.

[moonslav59]

Moon mentions that "Bogaerts took a step back this year, while Iglesias has hit .275 in Detroit." Wow. Iglesias hit 45 points lower this year (.255) than he did last year (.300), but that's not a "step back?!?!" Come on. At least argue apples to apples.

 

Even .255 is higher than most expected Iggy to hit.

 

How about them apples?

 

 

I said from the start, I'd take Iggy as my FT SS hitting .225, I'd be thrilled with .255 and 60-80 stolen hits from the opps every year.

[Spudboy]

I hope the Iggy fans read this and have a response for it.

 

What was I to glean from that?

 

I honestly do not know.

 

Iggy is inconsequential? He is so poorly valued by his manager that he may not play much in favor of another poor performer?

[Eddy Ballgame]

What was I to glean from that?

 

I honestly do not know.

 

Iggy is inconsequential? He is so poorly valued by his manager that he may not play much in favor of another poor performer?

 

Well, it certainly wasn't a manager giving his "starting" SS a vote of confidence. That's for sure.

[Eddy Ballgame]

Moon mentions that "Bogaerts took a step back this year, while Iglesias has hit .275 in Detroit." Wow. Iglesias hit 45 points lower this year (.255) than he did last year (.300), but that's not a "step back?!?!" Come on. At least argue apples to apples.

 

Even .255 is higher than most expected Iggy to hit.

 

How about them apples?

 

 

I said from the start, I'd take Iggy as my FT SS hitting .225, I'd be thrilled with .255 and 60-80 stolen hits from the opps every year.

 

Okay, I can respect your opinion there. You'd start him if he hit .225 with no pop because he's an above average fielder. Personally, I wouldn't want him on my team as a "utility" player, because I don't think he has the right make-up to handle it.

[S5Dewey]

Peavy also had Quality Starts against Toronto, Tampa and Baltimore that didn't result in wins. He didn't have one start less than 5 innings.

 

Iggy was a 'Mercedes price'? Now that's just hopelessly delusional.

 

Runner up ROY SS (no less!) batting >.300. What's your definition of Mercedes price?

[Eddy Ballgame]

Runner up ROY SS (no less!) batting >.300. What's your definition of Mercedes price?

 

I hope he saved that "Runner up Rookie of the Year" trophy, because I don't see much more "hardware" coming his way in the future....