Chris Sale traded to Braves

[Old Red]

Like most of us early in this thread, you were in favor of this trade, right?

 

It’s an understandable position. It’s been a long time since Sale was Sale. I bet plenty of folks expected him to be injured by now…

 

Not in Atlanta.

[notin]

Don't forget that back then we didn't know Giolito was going to be the sole replacement for Sale.

 

If we all knew that at the time, I think the consensus of opinions at the time would have been hugely negative.

 

When it looked like Giolito was a replacement for Sale, it was a clear step down in talent for an expected step up in IP. And with a bunch of young starters (Houck, Crawford, Bello), that was important, as it was supposed to tax the bullpen less. But when Giolito went down and they didn’t replace him despite the availability of numerous options, that was the real mistake.

 

The Sake trade didn’t work out. Some trades don’t. Some just don’t right away. But not replacing the IP from Giolito was just negligent…

[vegasbob]

Isn't it a wonderful feeling that going into ST 2025, your MI/DP combo will be Trevor Story and Vaughn Grissom ? Assuming you have 2 bench MI's on the 26, you have lots of choices: R. Gonzalez, D. Hamilton, E. Valdez, N. Sogard and even J. Westbrook.

 

Then there is Marcello Mayer , not even on the 40 man yet. Sorry MM , no room for you and we can't just sit you on the bench.

 

That looks like 8 players for 2 starters and 2 bench boys. The other 4 can man WooSox until the April injury bug bites the top 2 again.

[Old Red]

If the Sox could trade Story, don’t you think they would? Didn’t they try last offseason?

 

There were all kinds of rumors out there last offseason on this one, and that one being traded. None were.

[notin]

Isn't it a wonderful feeling that going into ST 2025, your MI/DP combo will be Trevor Story and Vaughn Grissom ? Assuming you have 2 bench MI's on the 26, you have lots of choices: R. Gonzalez, D. Hamilton, E. Valdez, N. Sogard and even J. Westbrook.

 

Then there is Marcello Mayer , not even on the 40 man yet. Sorry MM , no room for you and we can't just sit you on the bench.

 

That looks like 8 players for 2 starters and 2 bench boys. The other 4 can man WooSox until the April injury bug bites the top 2 again.

 

Westbrook, Sogard, and Gonzalez are fungible talents. Hamilton has some nice skills and glaring weaknesses. Ditto Valdez.

 

But this type of depth is hardly a problem. Hamilton isn’t going to replace Mayer. Neither is Sogard, Gonzalez, etc.

 

In 2025, the Sox likely have Story, Grissom, and Mayer fighting for two infield spots. The rest, if still around, challenge the odd man out for a bench spot…

[vegasbob]

Westbrook, Sogard, and Gonzalez are fungible talents. Hamilton has some nice skills and glaring weaknesses. Ditto Valdez.

 

But this type of depth is hardly a problem. Hamilton isn’t going to replace Mayer. Neither is Sogard, Gonzalez, etc.

 

In 2025, the Sox likely have Story, Grissom, and Mayer fighting for two infield spots. The rest, if still around, challenge the odd man out for a bench spot…

 

This situation of surplus MLB experienced back up infielders ( several of whom are now starting for an over .500 team most of 2024) emphasizes that Breslow needs to convert one or more or a basket full into some form of mid level pitching help.

Maybe Grissom is the bench player to keep him upright. I'm sure this will be sorted out in ST.

[notin]

Not in Atlanta.

 

When the trade was made, you griped about paying too much. Not about losing Sale, Just about losing $-7mill in the process. Great that your hindsight is 20/20…

[Bellhorn04]

If the Sox could trade Story, don’t you think they would? Didn’t they try last offseason?

 

I had no idea they tried trading him. Please share.

[Bellhorn04]

Like most of us early in this thread, you were in favor of this trade, right?

 

It’s an understandable position. It’s been a long time since Sale was Sale. I bet plenty of folks expected him to be injured by now…

 

I was in favor on December 30, 2023, because at that time I assumed they would be making other moves to upgrade the rotation. I still believed the 'full throttle' ******** at that time.

 

Plus I had heard a lot of glowing reviews about Grissom.

[Bellhorn04]

Like most of us early in this thread, you were in favor of this trade, right?

 

It’s an understandable position. It’s been a long time since Sale was Sale. I bet plenty of folks expected him to be injured by now…

 

I was in favor on December 30, 2023, because at that time I assumed they would be making other moves to upgrade the rotation. I still believed the 'full throttle' ******** at that time.

 

Plus I had heard a lot of glowing reviews about Grissom, who I knew very little about then.

[moonslav59]

To me, the worst part of the winter was the budget being cut by about $10M from 2023, while coming in about $10 to 15M under the tax line. (Of course, in hindsight, the Sale trade and Gio signings were the biggest disasters.)

 

We could have gone over the line, but chose not to even go a couple million under it.

[Bellhorn04]

Reasons the Sox traded him:

 

1) Chris's health is always in jeopardy.

2) They got a cheap second baseman with some potential in return.

3) They saved $10 million.

 

If Sale pitches something like the old Sale in 2024 this will indeed look questionable, so you could say Breslow rolled the dice.

 

I said this on Jan. 4.

[Bellhorn04]

I would say that if we don't add more than Giolito to our rotation, this deal becomes questionable, in terms of whether the team is actually trying to win or not.

 

And this.

[Bellhorn04]

Obviously that part is a dice roll. But I'll call this a questionable move on Opening Day if there are no further upgrades.

 

And this.

[Bellhorn04]

Yeah, like I say, as far as 2024 is concerned, this trade can only make sense if they acquire a good starter.

 

And this.

[moonslav59]

And this.

 

That's what got me, the most. Had we spent the "money saved," either on a $10M pitcher or by upgrading from Gio to Lugo or Imanaga, then this whole situation would not have been so bad.

[Bellhorn04]

That's what got me, the most. Had we spent the "money saved," either on a $10M pitcher or by upgrading from Gio to Lugo or Imanaga, then this whole situation would not have been so bad.

 

Yes. In isolation trading Sale could have made sense. But in the totality of the moves they made, it didn't. We needed a significant upgrade. Instead what we got was swapping Sale for Giolito. What we got was more of the same willful negligence we've seen for several years now.

[Old Red]

When the trade was made, you griped about paying too much. Not about losing Sale, Just about losing $-7mill in the process. Great that your hindsight is 20/20…

 

All that really matters right now is how things have turned out, and I still don’t like the Red Sox paying Atlanta $17M for a suspect, and I bet JH doesn’t either. I’m not claiming hindsight at all , but just how things have turned out.

[Old Red]

That's what got me, the most. Had we spent the "money saved," either on a $10M pitcher or by upgrading from Gio to Lugo or Imanaga, then this whole situation would not have been so bad.

 

You still don’t get that the Red Sox spent the $10M saved on Sale on Gio, and spent $35M together instead of $27M on Sale.

[moonslav59]

Yes. In isolation trading Sale could have made sense. But in the totality of the moves they made, it didn't. We needed a significant upgrade. Instead what we got was swapping Sale for Giolito. What we got was more of the same willful negligence we've seen for several years now.

 

Agreed. We had the money to try and mitigate the Gio signing: whether you call it the "money saved" on Sale or not, we did not spend it (all).

 

The "swap" of Gio for Sale was an overall cost increase, both in AAV and actual cost, but when you consider we lost the Paxton and Kluber's money, we barely kept rotation costs the same from '23 to '24.

 

It was just one way we neglected the rotation. There were others, including not signing enough experienced pitchers to minor league deals.

Edited August 15, 2024 by moonslav59

[notin]

I was in favor on December 30, 2023, because at that time I assumed they would be making other moves to upgrade the rotation. I still believed the 'full throttle' ******** at that time.

 

Plus I had heard a lot of glowing reviews about Grissom, who I knew very little about then.

 

I was in favor then because I had complete given up on getting anything out of Sale after he just kept getting injured year after year. It couldn’t have worked out worse. And then Breslow/whoever did nothing when Giolito went down. So disappointing.

 

I never figured out what “full throttle” meant. But when some Sox exec (Werner?) gave his explanation, all ingout out of it was he didn’t know what it meant either…

[notin]

All that really matters right now is how things have turned out, and I still don’t like the Red Sox paying Atlanta $17M for a suspect, and I bet JH doesn’t either. I’m not claiming hindsight at all , but just how things have turned out.

 

No one disagrees they’ve turned out badly. Not sure why you find it so necessary to reiterate it over and over…

[notin]

Yes. In isolation trading Sale could have made sense. But in the totality of the moves they made, it didn't. We needed a significant upgrade. Instead what we got was swapping Sale for Giolito. What we got was more of the same willful negligence we've seen for several years now.

 

Hypothetical question - how do you think the Sox would be if they acquired a career average Giolito? Career average for Giolito is 12-12, 4.43 ERA, 98 ERA+ over 193 IP…

[dgalehouse]

So, a team with a glaring need for starting pitching trades their best starting pitcher, their only proven winner, for a so-so infield prospect and throws in 17 million dollars to sweeten the deal. No problem. It's all good.

 

This was my take on the trade back in January. I was pretty much shouted down. Lol.

[Old Red]

No one disagrees they’ve turned out badly. Not sure why you find it so necessary to reiterate it over and over…

 

Because you, and others keep showing what I have posted before that I’m not disputing, or claiming hindsight. It works both ways.

[mvp 78]

You still don’t get that the Red Sox spent the $10M saved on Sale on Gio, and spent $35M together instead of $27M on Sale.

 

They made a bet that Giolito would give them more innings in 2024 than Sale. They were wrong.

[mvp 78]

No one disagrees they’ve turned out badly. Not sure why you find it so necessary to reiterate it over and over…

 

Mookie Betts lite.

[Old Red]

They made a bet that Giolito would give them more innings in 2024 than Sale. They were wrong.

 

I understand that, but MOOn keeps saying the Red Sox didn’t spend the $10M saved from Sale, and I believe they did, and then some.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

They made a bet that Giolito would give them more innings in 2024 than Sale. They were wrong.

 

From the beginning, some of us said Giolito was a bad bet. What good are more innings if he sucks, like he did in 2022 and 2023?

 

Sure, Breslow and Bailey were betting they were going to fix Gio -- but even if we don't assume the new stress on more sweepers stressed out his elbow -- this guy wasn't The Plan to fix the rotation...

 

... that was clear with the opt out that would let him leave if he did turn out to be the next Gausman. However, if Gio was mediocre to bad, but ate innings with his two-year borderline 5.00 ERA, then he could opt in.

 

That meant they just wanted him to help get them through another year or two on the mound, so they could field a team and sell tickets.

 

Meanwhile, with no additional rotation acquisitions, discerning Sox fans got what they won't pay for (by choosing not to visit Fenway): No Quality and No Quantity.

[moonslav59]

They made a bet that Giolito would give them more innings in 2024 than Sale. They were wrong.

 

I can certainly understand the reasoning behind trading the upside potential a Chris Sale had for a more durable but less upside pitcher like Gio, especially when you see how badly we've done with injury-prone pitchers over the years (Richards, Wacha, Hill, Kluber, Paxton...) It didn't work. We got it wrong.

 

That does not change the fact that there was a reason for trying it. (The other reason was to try and fix our worst position in 5 years: 2B.)

 

Anyway you look at it, we did not address the need to vastly improve our rotation. We basically swapped out Sale, Kluber and Paxton for Gio. I can understand not wanting to trade top prospects for pitching buy spending less AAV on Gio ($18.5M) + $17M for Sale to play in ATL vs last year's $27M for Sale, $10M for Kluber and $4M for Paxton was not what I had hoped for. Spending less to try and fix a rotation that was severely flawed last year is asking for failure.