Chris Sale traded to Braves

[Bellhorn04]

17 hours ago, notin said:

Also you left out the most famous LHP the club sold to the Yankees.

I don’t know about you, but I never heard of anyone talk about The Curse of Bob Ojeda…

I didn't forget about the Bambino being a lefty pitcher.  He's in this conversation too, yes.

Ojeda had an excellent season for the Mets in 1986 and beat us twice in the 1986 WS.  We got Schiraldi for him.  Ojeda's Curse Factor has been underrated.  

Does David Price belong on the list?  Unloading him was a financial positive and not a baseball negative.  But there was another guy involved in the trade that was a rather hefty loss.

 

 

 

[Bellhorn04]

17 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

I don't have a big issue with judging GMs on hindsight, but I can never agree with anyone who says, within all this context, that the "trade made no sense." That's not to say, we should have expected it to work our well, but I don't think anyone expected every part to go horribly wrong, like this.

What I'm saying is that in the context of the Red Sox signing no one else but Giolito, this trade didn't make sense as far as the Red Sox needs for 2024.  

But when you add in the context that the Red Sox were prioritizing the budget above all else and didn't actually care about making the playoffs in 2024, it does make more sense.

I agree that context is everything. 

[Bellhorn04]

16 hours ago, mvp 78 said:

 

 Sparky Lyle? 

Not a starter but okay, let's expand.

Very *sinister* stuff indeed.

 

[notin]

34 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Hugh thinks the trade was 100% about the budget.

mvp thinks the trade was about the budget and the fact they didn't really intend to compete this year.

So I'm certainly not alone in my beliefs.

 

Of course it was about the budget.  Specifically the portion of the budget that was repeatedly NOT PLAYING.  And had been a problem in this regard for 4 seasons.

Reportedly they tried to move Story as well..,

[moonslav59]

19 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

What I'm saying is that in the context of the Red Sox signing no one else but Giolito, this trade didn't make sense as far as the Red Sox needs for 2024.  

But when you add in the context that the Red Sox were prioritizing the budget above all else and didn't actually care about making the playoffs in 2024, it does make more sense.

I agree that context is everything. 

Agree 100%, especially once Gio went down.

I do think the budget trumps it all, and that is why we signed nobody else but Gio.

If notin's point about us being able to trade Sale and his full contract and not get Grissom back, then maybe we spend that "extra $17M" on Lugo or Imanaga. Despite the Gio injury, one of them might have been enough. 

As it turned out the DHam-Romy platoon at 2B became pretty good by the start of summer.

Had we just spent the same as last year, we could have signed a $10M pitcher or got by without O'Neill and got one of those same pitchers.

If, if, if...

[notin]

23 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

What I'm saying is that in the context of the Red Sox signing no one else but Giolito, this trade didn't make sense as far as the Red Sox needs for 2024.  

But when you add in the context that the Red Sox were prioritizing the budget above all else and didn't actually care about making the playoffs in 2024, it does make more sense.

I agree that context is everything. 

When they didn’t replace Giolito, that was when it became a problem.  Especially since there are still plenty of options still available at that time…

[Bellhorn04]

1 minute ago, notin said:

Of course it was about the budget.  Specifically the portion of the budget that was repeatedly NOT PLAYING.  And had been a problem in this regard for 4 seasons.

Reportedly they tried to move Story as well..,

Well, you're not really getting the part about the budget.  The premise is that if Henry authorized a bigger budget and was serious about competing in 2024, they don't make this trade. 

[Bellhorn04]

1 minute ago, notin said:

When they didn’t replace Giolito, that was when it became a problem.  Especially since there are still plenty of options still available at that time…

But that reflects their whole approach to 2024.  The budget was the priority, not winning.

[notin]

2 hours ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Well, you're not really getting the part about the budget.  The premise is that if Henry authorized a bigger budget and was serious about competing in 2024, they don't make this trade. 

I’m not sold on that.  A $27 mill pitcher constantly on the Injured List is not an asset any team wants.  If Texas could move deGrom, don’t you think they would?   If the Yankees had the chance, don’t you think they’d move Stanton?

 

 

 

[notin]

2 hours ago, Bellhorn04 said:

But that reflects their whole approach to 2024.  The budget was the priority, not winning.

With the exception of 2016-2019, hasn’t that always been the case?

This is a team that once had to move Marco Scutaro just so they could afford Cody Ross.

If Sale had gone more than 150 IP in the previous 4 years or had any reasonably healthy seasons in that stretch, think they still make this trade?

Reportedly the Sox had an offer in 2022 to take Sale and the entire contract in return for Diddly Squat.  If this was all about the budget, why not take that? Heck if this was all about budget, why not take less than Vaughn Grissom so they pay less than $17mill?

The savings here is $10mill for one year.  That’s not much of a salary dump. And they spent more than that almost immediately after this trade to replace Sale.  If this deal was all about budget, it was executed poorly from Day One…

[Bellhorn04]

23 minutes ago, notin said:

The savings here is $10mill for one year.  That’s not much of a salary dump. And they spent more than that almost immediately after this trade to replace Sale.  If this deal was all about budget, it was executed poorly from Day One…

$10 mill seems to matter plenty to Henry these days.  

 

[moonslav59]

2 hours ago, Bellhorn04 said:

But that reflects their whole approach to 2024.  The budget was the priority, not winning.

Exactly, and within this context, blaming Brez for trying to improve on SP'er IP by signing Gio and trading Sale, it makes more sense, at the time.

Of course, keeping Sale and not signing Gio would work for the budget and our success, but at the time, Brez was looking for an innings eater (Gio) and a RHB OF'er (O'Neill), plus pen help (Slaten, Weissert, I Campbell) with a tighter budget than the year before.

Remember, many felt we needed to replace Turner, too, and we never really replaced Bogey & others from 2022.

[notin]

3 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

$10 mill seems to matter plenty to Henry these days.  

 

Then why not take less back and save more money?

I’m asking legitimate questions that you’re not answering, and instead trying to use your theory to support itself.

Heck if this trade was “all about budget”, why sign Giolito at all? 

[Bellhorn04]

3 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

Exactly, and within this context, blaming Brez for trying to improve on SP'er IP by signing Gio and trading Sale, it makes more sense, at the time.

Of course, keeping Sale and not signing Gio would work for the budget and our success, but at the time, Brez was looking for an innings eater (Gio) and a RHB OF'er (O'Neill), plus pen help (Slaten, Weissert, I Campbell) with a tighter budget than the year before.

Remember, many felt we needed to replace Turner, too, and we never really replaced Bogey & others from 2022.

Yes, I think Brez got hamstrung by the budget.  I also think they basically lied to him when they hired him and told him he was going to have a bigger budget.  Peter Gammons said that was the case.  And I think Breslow alluded to it in his speech about "now that I've gotten to know the organization's objectives a little better blah blah blah"

[mvp 78]

1 minute ago, notin said:

Then why not take less back and save more money?

I’m asking legitimate questions that you’re not answering, and instead trying to use your theory to support itself.

Heck if this trade was “all about budget”, why sign Giolito at all? 

They thought Grissom's cheap contract would outweigh the $$$'s spent on Sale in the short term. 

[mvp 78]

2 minutes ago, notin said:

Then why not take less back and save more money?

I’m asking legitimate questions that you’re not answering, and instead trying to use your theory to support itself.

Heck if this trade was “all about budget”, why sign Giolito at all? 

Giolito seemed more likely to be able to last a full season than Sale. The rest of the Sox arms didn't have the history to show that they could hold up over 162 and we have seen what has happened to them in the 2nd half. 

[Bellhorn04]

4 minutes ago, notin said:

Then why not take less back and save more money?

I’m asking legitimate questions that you’re not answering, and instead trying to use your theory to support itself.

Heck if this trade was “all about budget”, why sign Giolito at all? 

I think this has been covered this many times.  Yes, they wanted to sign Giolito because they needed an innings eater.  That's a given.  Breslow also had some other moves he obviously wanted to make.

In order to make it all fit in the budget they had to cut somewhere.  The Sale trade was a $10 million cut.  Plus you could say it saved some money to get a second baseman.

What about this is not clear? 

[notin]

1 minute ago, Bellhorn04 said:

I think this has been covered this many times.  Yes, they wanted to sign Giolito because they needed an innings eater.  That's a given.  Breslow also had some other moves he obviously wanted to make.

In order to make it all fit in the budget they had to cut somewhere.  The Sale trade was a $10 million cut.  Plus you could say it saved some money to get a second baseman.

What about this is not clear? 

That explanation makes it not “all about the budget.”

When I think of a trade as being driven solely by the budget, the goal is to dump as much money as possible.  This series of events actually looked like a legitimate attempt to make the team better.  They acquired a pitcher who actually takes the mound every 5 days.  They acquired an actual potential solution at 2b, something lacking since what? Brock Holt in 2019.  Are these or are these not good things? Are these moves made with the goal of winning or saving money?

And all of this at a cost of a pitcher who had not pitched in 4 years, and a pitcher who had his worst full season in his last full season 5 years ago.  And, at age 35, was not a likely rebound candidate.   
 

Who was the 2023 team was a better candidate to move to upgrade 2b? Even Yoshida actually played. They moved a guy who has been contractual deadweight for FOUR YEARS.  If they suspected he’d rebound, he’d still be here.

And again, not much money was saved.  In fact they spent much more on the follow-up.

This deal looked to be about actually upgrading the team. They had no reason to expect Sale to play again at all, let alone at this level.  They found a buyer, and got a player they liked.  The premise that Atlanta clearly saw this comeback borders somewhere between pessimism and ridiculousness; even the Braves clearly hedged their bets here.

 

The biggest issue has been in hindsight, absolutely no part of this deal worked out for Boston.  And that they refused to try to address that situation despite ample opportunities, many of which did not have to cost much at all…

 

[moonslav59]

15 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Yes, I think Brez got hamstrung by the budget.  I also think they basically lied to him when they hired him and told him he was going to have a bigger budget.  Peter Gammons said that was the case.  And I think Breslow alluded to it in his speech about "now that I've gotten to know the organization's objectives a little better blah blah blah"

I'm not sure about the lying or deceiving part, but I'm not sure they did not lie, either.

We do know he spent the Gio money on the wrong guy. That was a big chunk of his budget. The only other tangible salary addition was O'Neill, which was 2/3 of what Dugo got for his final arb.

We lost the money on Turner, Dugo, Kike, Urias, Sale, Kluber, Paxton, Schreiber and added 2 guys plus the inexpensive Grissom, Slaten, Weissert, Campbell and prospects. 

The slash to the budget was obvious.

[notin]

26 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

They thought Grissom's cheap contract would outweigh the $$$'s spent on Sale in the short term. 

Probably true.  Mainly because Sale was expensive and rarely pitched…

[notin]

30 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

Giolito seemed more likely to be able to last a full season than Sale. The rest of the Sox arms didn't have the history to show that they could hold up over 162 and we have seen what has happened to them in the 2nd half. 

So doesn’t that logic make this trade more about winning than just slashing payroll?

[mvp 78]

Just now, notin said:

So doesn’t that logic make this trade more about winning than just slashing payroll?

If they were just slashing payroll, they wouldn't have signed Giolito. However, they still had 162 games to play and a roster to fill out. Funny how that works. 

[notin]

1 minute ago, mvp 78 said:

If they were just slashing payroll, they wouldn't have signed Giolito. However, they still had 162 games to play and a roster to fill out. Funny how that works. 

But they could have spent less than $18mill to do so.  There were other options…

[Old Red]

16 minutes ago, notin said:

That explanation makes it not “all about the budget.”

When I think of a trade as being driven solely by the budget, the goal is to dump as much money as possible.  This series of events actually looked like a legitimate attempt to make the team better.  They acquired a pitcher who actually takes the mound every 5 days.  They acquired an actual potential solution at 2b, something lacking since what? Brock Holt in 2019.  Are these or are these not good things? Are these moves made with the goal of winning or saving money?

And all of this at a cost of a pitcher who had not pitched in 4 years, and a pitcher who had his worst full season in his last full season 5 years ago.  And, at age 35, was not a likely rebound candidate.   
 

Who was the 2023 team was a better candidate to move to upgrade 2b? Even Yoshida actually played. They moved a guy who has been contractual deadweight for FOUR YEARS.  If they suspected he’d rebound, he’d still be here.

And again, not much money was saved.  In fact they spent much more on the follow-up.

This deal looked to be about actually upgrading the team. They had no reason to expect Sale to play again at all, let alone at this level.  They found a buyer, and got a player they liked.  The premise that Atlanta clearly saw this comeback borders somewhere between pessimism and ridiculousness; even the Braves clearly hedged their bets here.

 

The biggest issue has been in hindsight, absolutely no part of this deal worked out for Boston.  And that they refused to try to address that situation despite ample opportunities, many of which did not have to cost much at all…

 

Like I’ve been saying all along that i don’t believe Gio would have been signed without dumping $10M of Sale’s salary. They ended up spending $35M on the moves compared to $27.5M if they would have just kept sale. That adds up to an increase, and not any savings of $10M, which I’ve heard so many times on here. Atlanta had interest in Sale last year as well, so to say that had more foresight, and pessimism than Boston did is not a stretch at all. Atlanta was right, and Brez, and Boston was wrong, and Atlanta will reap the benefits of a CY Young season.

[moonslav59]

28 minutes ago, notin said:

That explanation makes it not “all about the budget.”

When I think of a trade as being driven solely by the budget, the goal is to dump as much money as possible.  This series of events actually looked like a legitimate attempt to make the team better.  They acquired a pitcher who actually takes the mound every 5 days.  They acquired an actual potential solution at 2b, something lacking since what? Brock Holt in 2019.  Are these or are these not good things? Are these moves made with the goal of winning or saving money?

And all of this at a cost of a pitcher who had not pitched in 4 years, and a pitcher who had his worst full season in his last full season 5 years ago.  And, at age 35, was not a likely rebound candidate.   
 

Who was the 2023 team was a better candidate to move to upgrade 2b? Even Yoshida actually played. They moved a guy who has been contractual deadweight for FOUR YEARS.  If they suspected he’d rebound, he’d still be here.

And again, not much money was saved.  In fact they spent much more on the follow-up.

This deal looked to be about actually upgrading the team. They had no reason to expect Sale to play again at all, let alone at this level.  They found a buyer, and got a player they liked.  The premise that Atlanta clearly saw this comeback borders somewhere between pessimism and ridiculousness; even the Braves clearly hedged their bets here.

 

The biggest issue has been in hindsight, absolutely no part of this deal worked out for Boston.  And that they refused to try to address that situation despite ample opportunities, many of which did not have to cost much at all…

 

Agreed. I'd add that ATL could also afford to part with Grissom, because they have better options at 2B. We did not think we did, although DHam and Romy did okay, after 2 months of scrambling and failing, there.

[mvp 78]

18 minutes ago, notin said:

But they could have spent less than $18mill to do so.  There were other options…

They want a team that is close enough to .500 to be seen as competitive. Would the currently injured Michael Lorenzen have made a real difference (5.00 FIP)? 

[notin]

19 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

They want a team that is close enough to .500 to be seen as competitive. Would the currently injured Michael Lorenzen have made a real difference (5.00 FIP)? 

Over the 0 IP they got from Giolito? Probably…

[mvp 78]

36 minutes ago, notin said:

Over the 0 IP they got from Giolito? Probably…

So they end up at 81-81 instead of 78-84? 

[notin]

4 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

So they end up at 81-81 instead of 78-84? 

So you just argued that they could have gotten better by slashing even more payroll…

[mvp 78]

1 hour ago, notin said:

So you just argued that they could have gotten better by slashing even more payroll…

If Lorenzen shows up to Sox camp, there's no telling what Bailey does to Lorenzen's elbow! Maybe the Sox are even worse trotting out Lorenzen as it pushes their Game 5 starter (Houck) to the pen for the year!