moonslav59

Yes, but I don't hate Pom.

Of course I hated the trade, because I believe Espi will be better than Pom (or the same but for double the years at a lower cost). I know I can be wrong on this. I also know it's not always fair to judge a trade or a GM by how trades ended up working out. We needed a starter, and trading for a 2 month rental would have been costly too. I'm glad we got 2.5 years not 0.33. I'm bummed Pom's injury is lingering, but I hated the deal before I found out about the pre-existing condition- now it looks worse.

My beef was not with Pom. I liked and still like him. As you feel, I'm more and more feeling worse about his end of the deal. I didn't expect Pom to reach the full potential of Espi, nor did I expect him to repeat his numbers in SD 2016. I did expect him to do better than a 1.4 WHIP. The injury issue is probably the reason he was that bad, but injuries count when evaluating a trade post-trade. Everyone knows I hated the trade day one, and right from the start I said it wasn't about Pom. I se it like this: we traded 5-6 years of team control with Espi for 2.5 years of Pom. I get why we did it. We needed a starter and he came with 2 more years after 2016. I get that he was/is more of a proven commodity, and Espi is speculative value only. To me, it was more about double the control years, and my belief that in 3-4 years, we will not be able to keep all our stars. Having a low cost pitcher to take over for Porcello or C Sale could solve more than one problem. If Espi can replace one of those two without a big drop off in production, we could use the money saved to keep one more of our stars. I'm not afraid to look that far ahead. I realize Espi might amount to no more than Owens or Barnes. I get that, but his upside is enormous. I'd have been fine with trading Moncada, Espi or Kopech, Basabe and Diaz for Sale last summer. We'd still have Kopech or Espi AND Sale. I know that sounds like I'm contradicting myself, since that sounds like it was about Pom not Espi, but 3.5 years of Sale vs 2.5 of Pom is night and day..

Certainly he could. I wasn't thrilled by what he gave us "already". He finished 6th in IP and 10th in team pitching WAR. 4.59 ERS/1.369 WHIP I think Sox management expected much better than that. I'm not trying to bash Pom. As much as I hated the deal, I like Pom. I expected him to do better last year, and I'm expecting him to do well, if healthy for the next two year. I just think Espi is going to be something very very special.

We have 2 days off in April (the 7th and 14th) and then the next on May 2nd. We can do with out a 5th starter for one rotation. We will need a 5th starter for our 7th game of the season. The way I figure it, our 5th starter will get 4 starts in April as the others get 5 each.

That's assuming our medical staff knows what they are doing.

1) He doesn't need to be HOF to end up producing way more than even what a good Pom may give us in 2 years. 2) Pom may not give us much- making what Espi needs to give barely allstar material to be a big gain. 3) Espi has a significant chance at being a very very good player.

I've been super high on Espi since the start. People still talk about the Bagwell trade, so I think there is a chance we'll be talking about this trade for many years to come.

I'm okay with the criteria. There has to be a cut-off somewhere.

If you were referring to Wake. Wake was an iron man.

This is the deal I have the biggest beef with. I realize Espi is just potential value, but his upside is so damn high, I shudder at the thought of what we might have lost.

Like I said, I'll take quality over quantity. According to this: http://theprocessreport.net/the-top-...0s-are-coming/ Beni has a 83% chance of a WAR>3.0 Devers has a 74% chance. Groome has a 59% chance.

Travis did not make the list. Former prospects inclded Moncada, Kopech, and Margot. I only looked quickly but didn't see Guerra, Dubon, or Basabe. You missed Espi at #21.

"What's Wrom with Pom?"

Well said. Our priorities are messed up. Some countries have laws where the top person in a company can't make more than 20 times the lowest guy. That makes some sense to me. You have to keep the incentive to make more for doing more or being smarter, but how much is just too damn much? It's sick how worker productivity has risen, while their pay has fallen, and those who just "invest" or "speculate" make millions and billions.

There's a difference if they view the team as a business or a hobby. The billionaires spend what they want for enjoyment, so it might seem obvious they'd want to spend whatever it takes to enjoy their shiny toy and watch it win championships. Plus, there's some fame involved with owning champions. Most really rich people got to where they are not by spending big to look good or be happy, but by keeping expenses low and looking for more and more ways to make more and more money. Just because profits are extremely high, doesn't mean one is obliged to spend more.

True enough. I guess when you're a multi billionaire, a few million can be called "frivolous". I'd be happy with just a few hundred grand.

I guess we were dinged for not having many prospects, in case the great ones we have don't work out- strength in numbers. I'll take quality over quantity any day.

lol.

His L-R splits have been very close, so I'm not sure that was a major factor. I think they did not want to spend large at DH. They may have thought 3-4 years was too long and would keep then from being able to extend someone. I also think they like the idea of HanRam and maybe eventually Pablo at DH their last or last couple contract years.

We have the highest surplus value and the highest mean value, but I'm not sure what that all means.

I really think Sox management viewed HanRam and/or Pablo as the eventual replacement(s) for Papi when they signed them.. The signing of Moreland to at least play 1B vs RHPs somewhat supports that idea. Signing EE would pretty much force HanRam and Pablo to be our corner IF'ers until their or EE's time was up. Also, when we play in NL parks, HanRam or EE would have to sit. Of course, with an unlimited budget, none of these factors would or should have prevented an EE signing instead of Moreland, but signing EE to multiple years would put us in danger of hitting the $20M over the threshold line or possible prevent us from extending one of our players for fear of hitting that penalty line next season.

Baseball America's Top 100 Sox and ex-Sox: 1. Benintendi 2. Moncada 18. Devers 21. Espinoza 24. Margot 32. Kopech 43. Groome Wow! 5 Red Sox products in the top 24. That's 1 out of every 5! 7 in the top 43. That's just about 1 in 6!

I totally get that argument, and I don't disagree with it. If I was that rich, I wouldn't care about tax penalties on my toys (baseball team). However, I think he views this as a business too, and he didn't get where he is today by spending frivolously. I can see wanting to rest the luxury tax from time to time to try and keep added expenses down, but I get the feeling this might be the last year we're under for a while. I do think they avoid going $20M over, so they don't start losing picks and reducing slot money.

The league might argue that we were given an updated injury report and the chance to reverse the trade already. We rolled the dice and maybe lost, if he is indeed still recovering from that same injury and performs poorly as a result.