Jayhawk Bill

I don't dispute that--but they hadn't agreed to it, and they were negotiating for free agency years. Those years of service can be acquired only at free agency rates.

Per Cot's Contracts it was in July 2006. http://mlbcontracts.blogspot.com/2004/12/boston-red-sox.html

You said, "One rookie... one played a major role." You didn't restrict rookie status...and I remember hundreds of cyberspace denizens claiming that Matsuzaka and, especially, Okajima were worthless last winter because they were unprovn in MLB...because they were "rookies." If you, too, think that Manny will suck in 2009, I concede the point. If you believe that he'll be worth $20 million, my point stands.

Dustin Pedroia, 2007 .317/.380/.442 Dustin Pedroia, 9/07 .302/.330/.434 The injury cost Dustin OBP, but not too much BA or SLG. That makes sense: his right hand drove the bat; his injured left hand controlled his swing. Pedroia hit .283/.348/.483 in the postseason, injured, against better-than-average pitching. My sabermetric estimation is that he had balls.

I don't know if we'll both be posting here in the 2009-2010 Hot Stove League, but I guarantee you that I'll remember this post if we're both still here. If we are both here, this is a preview of my intended comment: . Manny was a great hitter and is an inner-circle HOFer, but he's going to continue his decline over the next three years. Whether that decline costs him OPS or games played or his ability to play the outfield I can't foresee, but I know that Manny 2009

But you can't count post-free agency eligible years added in a later extension as part of the trade. Boston paid free agent pricing for those years. Theo's decision to get Beckett to agree to an extension before free agent values escalated 30% last offseason and Beckett's value escalated maybe 50% this season looks pretty darn good right now--but that wasn't something that Boston received in the trade. But yes, Sanchez and Ramirez each carried six pre-free agency years. That's why Florida wanted them. FWIW, check the estimated salaries for Hanley Ramirez I postulated for 2010 and 2011. Superstars make big money in later arb years; the system projects he'll make $37.9 million those last two years. Unless Florida is on the verge of contending once again, you can bet that Ramirez will be gone for more prospects after one arb year, saving Florida over half of the estimated salary for a mere quarter of the estimated performance...and making Florida win by even more. Rich teams are not obligated to be stupid teams. We shouldn't consider the model of the Yankees to be the requisite strategy for rich teams ; Boston can win trades, too. ***************************************************************** Yeah, that's the conventional wisdom. The thing is, AJ Burnett was considered roughly equivalent to Josh Beckett, and he did become available as a free agent, and he signed for not much more than Beckett did while Beckett was in the midst of his 5.01 ERA first season with Boston. Ace starting pitchers are available through free agency. They cost money--but every defender of the trade keeps stating that Boston has money, so it's OK. I disagree; Boston's off-season trades should be made at market value. ***************************************************************** Indispensable? Boston could've realistically had AJ Burnett (signed instead of Beckett), Carlos Pena (retained because Youkilis was playing third base), Hanley Ramirez and an additional deadline pickup instead of Lowell, Beckett and Lugo (who would've been superfluous with Hanley Ramirez at shortstop). That would've been a better team than the 2007 Red Sox, largely because Lugo sucked at shortstop and Hanley Ramirez is now MVP-caliber at shortstop, but also because Carlos Pena hit better than Mike Lowell and AJ Burnett had a sub-4.00 ERA just like Josh Beckett. I already gave very considerable credit to Boston for the roles Lowell and Beckett played this postseason. It's just not enough to realistically make the trade a "win." Boston did get greater value in the first two years after the trade than Florida did. If that's the metric you choose--concentrating value into the near future--the trade worked. The challenge is that a strategy of giving away talent through such trades will eventually result in a team bereft of talent for a few years, and Red Sox Nation seemed unwilling to accept a winning, contending third-place season such as 2006, let alone a true rebuilding season. ***************************************************************** Boston got a pitcher for two years who posted a 5.01 ERA last year. Regarding the championship, a few other players helped, too, and the trade wasn't the only path to the 2007 World Series. Dunno, but I do know that Hanley Ramirez will make roughly MLB minimum next year while Josh Beckett makes $9.5 MM. Whatever their true salary values, Boston is paying $9 million more for their remaining star player...and they only have him because they cut a deal with his agent, else they'd have nothing and the Marlins could have all of the players they'd received in the trade.

Let's be clear. I give reasons for my posts. You're spouting your opinions as fact without any support whatsoever. Treat my ideas with respect, I treat yours with respect. Treat mine like crap, and I treat yours likewise.

Bump. So I'm thread-mining on a slow night, and I run across this argument where it's the world against Gom, and I realize that Gom is right even though his reasons are all wrong. Who won the Beckett-and-Lowell for Hanley Ramirez-and-Sanchez trade? Florida. Not even close. Everybody here seems to be evaluating this trade on the basis of current talent levels. That's grossly inadequate. Trades need to be evaluated on these bases: 1) Talent gained over replacement level; 2) Years (or months) and postseasons through which that talent would be available; and 3) Payroll impact. Let's look at the trade through those metrics. Assumptions: 1) Only the four principal players in the trade matter, with values assessed by WARP1; 2) Only the obligated service in place at the trade counts; 3) Performance in a postseason reflective of a player's value during the regular season doubles that player's value for that season, but with no postseason appearances assumed after 2007; 4) Players' value beyond 2007 will be determined through MORP, with arb salaries assessed at 40%, 60% and 80% of MORP for the first, second and third arb years; and 5) The Marginal Cost per Marginal Win is $3 million, slightly higher than the 1999-2006 level for the Yankees and the Red Sox, and just higher than Boston's actual 2006 MC/MW of $2,966,412. Now let's check values and salaries. Josh Beckett: 2006: 5.4 2007: 8.4 x 2 = 16.8 Total wins = 22.2 Salary: 2006: $4.325 MM 2007: $6 MM + $2 MM bonus Total salary = $12.325 MM Beckett had only two obligated years when he came to Boston. Theo did a great job signing him through 2009 with a club option for 2010, but that wasn't the trade, that was Theo. *** Mike Lowell 2006: 6.3 2007: 7.4 x 2 = 14.8 Total wins = 21.1 Salary: 2006: $9 MM 2007: $9 MM Total salary = $18 MM *** Anibal Sanchez 2006: 4.3 2007: 0.4 2008: 3.9 2009: 3.4 2010: 3.5 2011: 2.7 Total wins = 18.2 Salary: 2006: 0.4 MM 2007: 0.4 MM 2008: 0.4 MM 2009: 3.7 MM 2010: 6.3 MM 2011: 6.3 MM Total salary = $17.5 MM *** Hanley Ramirez 2006: 7.5 2007: 8.9 2008: 6.4 2009: 6.6 2010: 6.8 2011: 6.8 Total wins = 43.0 Salary: 2006: 0.4 MM 2007: 0.4 MM 2008: 0.4 MM 2009: 9.7 MM 2010: 16.3 MM 2011: 21.6 MM Total salary = $48.8 MM *** Boston: Total Wins: 43.3 Total Salary: $30.3 MM Florida: Total Wins: 61.2 Total Salary: $66.3 MM Florida ends up getting 17.9 extra wins at a cost of $36 MM in salary. The price for those wins is just over $2 MM each, not the $3 MM MC/MW postulated as a fair standard: Florida wins. If the "extra" wins for Boston's 2007 postseason are discounted, the trade tilts more heavily in Florida's favor. ***************************************************************** Look, it's not just HanRam and Sanchez for Lowell and Beckett. Lowell and Beckett made $16 MM more than HanRam and Sanchez this year. That's another All Star that Boston could afford had they not made the trade. One can't ignore salary issues and just look at talent; payroll dollars can be converted into talent. Realistically, picture Boston with Hanley Ramirez, Anibal Sanchez, Carlos Pena and AJ Burnett--and a deadline acquisition--instead of Julio Lugo, Mike Lowell and Josh Beckett. No alternative team could do better than winning the World Series, but the proposed roster certainly could have, and I'd rather have HanRam, Pena and Sanchez under contract than just Josh Beckett as we head for the Winter Meetings and prepare for 2008. Boston lost the trade. Bummer. We still won a World Series.

Just sayin', the splits don't show that. Excellent points. I don't like it when people restrict discussion to the very few players with current active rumors, and your ideas make sense. From what I'm seeing, though, the White Sox seem to think that they're a contending team--I don't think that they're trying to ditch salary and rebuild. Why else would they offer so much to Uribe? :dunno: ***************************************************************** If Lowell takes a 3/36 contract, it'll prove that he's willing to give a huge hometown discount because of his love for the Red Sox and Boston. The rumored choices are 3/36 with Boston or 5/70 with New York, and Mike Lowell enjoyed his time with the Yankees...I don't consider this to be close at all.

Tony Graffanino says "Hi." There are three ways out of the no-trade protection offered via arbitration, IIRC: 1) The team and the player can settle rather than going through the actual arbitration process, creating a contract without no-trade protections; 2) The player can waive the no-trade protection; or 3) The team can release the player before the start of the season for a small fraction of his salary. In Gagne's case, like Graffanino's, the third option might come into play. Conversely, if Gagne posted a 0.00 ERA through 10 Spring Training outings, I'd wager that Gagne would happily waive his no-trade protection to be the closer for any one of the half-dozen teams that would show interest at that point.

My point is that Crisp is worth far more than Laird. I suggested Teagarden, a derailed prospect unable to catch two-thirds of his games who's still in High-A/AA at 23 because he lost a year to injury, to make up the difference. http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=6584 Pauley was one of three pitchers mentioned as MLB-ready to balance out the trade--I expect that Texas would want a little more than Coco Crisp for both Laird and Teagarden. Pauley's MLB-ready. He's roughly a 4/5 starter with an excellent GB% (55% in 2007). http://www.minorleaguesplits.com/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?pl=456102&tm=PawIL&bp=p&bip=1 Texas desperately needs pitching arms--Pauley offers roughly 100 quality IP each season: http://www.soxprospects.com/players/pauley-dave.htm Pre-season Pauley projected to be a guy who'd peak at an ERA of about 5.25 in MLB. http://www.baseballprospectus.com/pecota/pauleda01.php Nothing he's done in 2007 suggests any big change to that. Three of Texas's five starting pitchers had ERAs higher than that in 2007--I think that David Pauley is definitely a pitcher who could help the Texas Rangers. Pauley = Teagarden? No, I never posted that. Crisp and Pauley ~ Laird and Teagarden? Yes: Texas fills two slots (CF and fifth starter) for their second-best catcher and a blocked prospect with injury questions.

Thanks! No quarrels with that: my quibble was that you wrote that he had just two pitches. He has three, he uses three, but his changeup isn't MLB-caliber yet. I think that I've posted elsewhere that he likely projects as a relief pitcher, too. I do, however, expect that he'll be very good if used strictly in relief, no more than once through the lineup each outing, even if he doesn't ever improve his changeup. My understanding is that Kontos had better success with his curveball late this year and that he's been making good progress with his changeup in the Hawaiian Winter League--I wouldn't write him off as a potential starter just yet. [/tangent] Just as I wouldn't write off Masterson as a starting pitcher, either.

Three: September 16, 21 and 30. He allowed no runs in 13 of 20 of his regular-season outings. Maybe he choked under pressure, and that's why he allowed runs in almost every save situation and didn't in almost every non-save situation. Toss in four-run leads with save situations and you've got every run he allowed except for one, that one coming in his first game back following "arm trouble."

Konerko, career: .281/.353/.495 Konerko, career in Fenway: .265/.344/.434 FWIW, I don't think that the White Sox are shopping Konerko. :dunno:

Yes, but Pedro was somehow almost cute while doing it; abrasive, but cute. And he was smart--when it wore thin in his contract year, he brought Nelson de la Rosa along for comic relief. A-Rod hasn't yet found a ballclub that can assimilate him. For what it's worth, I believe that the Boston Red Sox could do that: I believe the team to be greater and stronger than A-Rod's personality. I just have to say that those who believe otherwise might have a point. Although...if A-Rod came to Boston for 26,999,999 per year guaranteed for three years and 29,999,999 per year guaranteed for five more years, I think that every shred of ill will generated in the past could be dissolved with the stroke of a pen on the contract.

Pardon, but I'm only familiar with the Red Sox, where pitchers try to throw pitches that will be effective. You appear to be familiar with the Yankees: in the Yankees system, do pitchers frequently choose to throw pitches that will not be useful, perhaps to get work for their defense or excitement for fans in the outfield?

Does anybody else think that Gagne started having panic attacks in save situations after he was shelled for four runs in one-third of an inning on August 10, setting up a Boston loss? After that he pitched 15.1 innings with a 4.70 ERA, but in four save situations he allowed 7 runs in 3.1 IP while in 12 non-save situations he allowed one run in 12 IP. He blew three out of four save opportunities, and Papelbon had to bail him out of the eighth in the other. In twelve other games he was lights-out.

Let's check a scouting report on Masterson: http://www.soxprospects.com/players/masterson-justin.htm You're right that his two best pitches are a sinker and a slider, but his changeup is his third pitch.

http://rangers.scout.com/2/686465.html Teagarden is older than Salty, so his prospect value is diminished, and he was only able to catch about a third of his games, so the aftereffects of his surgery are still an issue. The Rangers want more MLB-ready talent: if they'd consider a guy such as David Pauley, Bryce Cox or Craig Breslow along with Crisp to balance things, this might be a workable deal. Teagarden is a question mark and he's blocked by Salty, but he's a good hitter with good strike-zone discipline who can call a game well. The issue is that he's got no experience above AA and his injuries are a question--if not for that, the Rangers wouldn't need Salty.

Well, technically he'd be arb-eligible, although I'd expect Boston to sign him to a four-year deal for about $70-80 million if they traded for him. He got $7.4 million through arb in 2007; I'd expect at least $11 million in 2008 and $14 million in 2009 through arb if his performance stayed constant. *** You know, I was reluctant to post on the side of an argument opposing you, TheKilo, so I did a quick double-check on his 20 PECOTA comparables, eliminating those whose performance at age 24 was more than a win better or worse than his. Here are the ones who remained (descending order of comparability): Cal Ripken, Jr. Frank Robinson Dick Allen Jeff Bagwell Rocky Colavito I'm pretty high on Ellsbury, but after seeing this I've gotta say that, if I got permission to negotiate a contract pre-trade, I might consider Ellsbury and Lester. Might. Not Buchholz--Lester. Might. But four years of Miggy Cabrera might work out for Boston.

I respectfully disagree. Check the Official 07 Offseason Thread, where I've posted a few pages' worth of data regarding the comparative values of the two players. In a nutshell, Coco's great defense and Salty's lousy defense make this much closer than it seems if one just looks at batting stats, and Salty was only about 50% of the value that Texas got for just 1.33 years of Teixeira--Crisp is cost-controlled through 2010, not 2008.

Exactly, and it was all for 1.33 seasons of Teixeira, not even two years' worth of playing time, and Teixeira wasn't cost-controlled for 2008. Let's look at what was written about the trade at the time: http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=6529 Salty was the centerpiece in return value going to Texas, but BP valued SS Elvis Andrus at roughly 80% of Salty's five-year value. Neftali Feliz was filthy at Danville this year, holding opposing batters to a .522 OPS, and he got 21 strikeouts in 13 IP at Spokane. Ron Mahay, of course, is a 36-year-old pitcher who played minor league baseball at ages 34 and 35--he filled a role for the Braves, but his value was negligible. Salty was only about half of the value going to Texas. All of that for 1.33 seasons of Mark Teixeira, next year not cost-controlled. What would three full cost controlled seasons of Coco Crisp be worth--at least, perhaps, the half of Teixeira's 1.33 year value represented by Saltalamacchia? Regarding your last question: Cheez, dunno? How often is it that rookies of Jacoby Ellsbury's caliber appear as late-season callups on teams that are good enough to make the ALCS? I think that you'd find a pretty high correlation. But the issue isn't Ellsbury's value, it's Coco Crisp's. Sure, if you just look at his hitting, Coco is just below the median among full-time MLB center fielders. But let's combine hitting and defensive value in two run-denominated stats, VORP and FRAA: NAME VORP+FRAA C Granderson 93 Ichiro Suzuki 78 Carlos Beltran 60 Aaron Rowand 57 Hunter Pence 52 Grady Sizemore 47 B.J. Upton 43 Torii Hunter 40 Coco Crisp 40 Nick Swisher 38 G Matthews Jr. 29 Willy Taveras 23 Melky Cabrera 23 Johnny Damon 21 Mike Cameron 19 Marlon Byrd 16 Jacque Jones 16 Dave Roberts 14 Andruw Jones 13 Chris Young 9 Alfredo Amezaga 5 Jim Edmonds 0 David DeJesus -1 Vernon Wells -1 Corey Patterson -3 Juan Pierre -3 Bill Hall -5 You mentioned Torii Hunter: Coco Crisp is suddenly tied with Hunter in value. He was better than Andruw Jones in, admittedly, an off year for Jones. Coco was tied for eighth-best CF in MLB using VORP+FRAA. I subjectively consider that "very good," although YMMV. Looked at from another perspective, Coco was worth 6.0 WARP1 this year. He was forecast to be worth 13.1 wins from 2008-2010 entering 2007; that'll go up. Salty was forecast to be worth 12.7 wins over those same years; that'll possibly go down because of his somewhat disappointing 2007 (0.3 WARP1 in MLB this year due to low OBP and bad defense behind the plate, although his 85 AB in MiLB might add a win to that value). *** Look, this is a classic case of a trade where it's easy to miss the players' respective value. Coco Crisp's value is his defense, which is, for many of us, almost intangible. Saltalamacchia's liability is his defense--he may be challenged to catch at the MLB level. If defensive stats are included, objective analysis rates Crisp as the same as or better than Salty. The only issue is the number of years on their respective obligations. That's worth some consideration, but I don't see it as worth a pitcher, Masterson, who projects to be Derek Lowe with a higher IQ once he's ready for the majors.

Career Fielding Runs Above Replacement Level (FRAR): Willie Mays: +634 Hank Aaron: +422 Joe DiMaggio: +303 Manny Ramirez: -15 This puts him behind Willie Mays, Joe DiMaggio, and Hank Aaron. And it's not even close. *** I'm not saying Manny can't hit. I'm saying that Manny can't field, and that Boston already has a DH. Before the DH--and sometimes even after the DH--players like Manny didn't have the longevity of some others. We'll see. Mine is a minority position: I say Manny isn't worth $20 million in 2009. Frankly, I don't think it's even close. That said, let's see if the option is exercised, and let's look at 2008 performance as a hint to which way it will go.