What made it a disaster was he did not pitch, and was ineffective on the rare days he did.
Kluber also pitched 160 IP the year before the Sox signed him; Sale had thrown 150 IP total in the previous 4 years. Was he also going to be a $27mill depth signing?
I am not saying the Sox came close to "winning this trade" or it is working out. But for the previous few years, every Spring, I would say the season hinges on Sale, and I always, always, always got the exact same 5 word response verbatim - "you can;t count on Sale."
But now, after 4 years of almost no activity, the Sox should have coutned on Sale, based on events that did not exist at the time of the trade?
Will we be having these exact same discussions every year? We have pitchers who simply cannot take the mound for Boston, and then go elsewhere and have success, as then suddenly we ignore their previous issues based on hindsight. Eovaldi, Wacha, and now Sale.
Plus there was another factor with Sale that might be getting ignored. It looks a lot like he was interested in getting extended, or, at a minimum, having his option exercised. Should the Sox have done that in January? Tack on another full season to a pitcher who hasn't thrown one in 5 years?
Atlanta played that smart, too, they gave him the extension it looks like he wanted so Sale would approve the trade. And it just happens to coincide in length with the (worst case) pre-arb years for Elder, Waldrep, Smith-Shawver, etc.
They played it smart, because they had the depth to, unlike the Sox...