Re: Stephen Drew will not accept the qualifying offer that Boston made him!
posted at 11/8/2013 11:00 AM EST
In response to Sheriff-Rojas' comment:
In response to dgalehouse's comment:
In response to moonslav59's comment:
In response to tvfrank's comment:
No team has had more busts there as well.
No team has a worse record of keeping good SS's than Boston.
Players who did well before coming here, but not here.
Players that did well once they left here.
Players that did both.
Was Lugo good when we dumped him?
Did anyone really want Renteria to stick around?
Scutaro was no longer a SS when we dumped him.
You want to give Farrell back to Toronto for Aviles?
Lowrie is better at 2B or 3B.
Iggy is one I wish we'd have kept, but the jury is still out on that one.
The jury has just rendered a verdict. A bad trade. A deadline panic move. We gave up a sensational young shortstop for a past his prime pitcher. The spin
is that Peavy helped us win a championship. The truth is that he had little to do with it. Whatever he contributed, Workman or Doubront could have done as well or better.
Everything you just wrote here is spin too. The result was the Red Sox won a World Series without Iggy. Maybe the Red Sox still would have won without Peavy, but to imply that Workman and Doubront would have filled the role as starters is a big stretch. You also fail to take into account that if either Workman and Doubront started, they wouldn't be available for the key roles they played in extra relief support. Any way you cut it, Dempster would have had a bigger role to play if Peavy wasn't there. I was glad that Dempster was pitching mopup, which is where he belonged.
Agree. You have to look at everything because in baseball, nothing happens in a vacuum. To add:
Who knows how Workman would have done had he stayed in the rotation. He was pitching well, but there also was no book on him. The fact is, Peavy pitched well in eight of the 10 starts he made and his average of 6.5 innings per start is decent in this day in age. What if Workman pitched well but went only 5.5 innings per start as the season went on. That could have put more wear and tear on the bullpen. We don't know if that would have happened, but we do know that it didn't happen with Peavy.
Remember -- for all the chicken-and-bear talk, a huge reason for 2011 collapse was no pitching depth. After Buchholz got hurt, the Sox had just Lester and Beckett. They were throwing out Andrew Miller, Kyle Wieland, a washed-up Wakefield, Eric Bedard, etc.
Again remember -- Doubrant and Dempster both hit walls late in the season. When Buchholz came back, Peavy allowed the Sox to skip each of them and both had good outings after being skipped. Maybe they could have done it with Workman, but if he wasn't pitching well the Sox would have been forced to keep going to them. The depth Peavy gave them was key in helping the Sox pull away in the AL East.
And even though Workman had mixed results in the bullpen during the regular season, he became key in the postseason. That experiene had to have helped him adjust to the role.
Also, what can't be overlooked is it's indesputable that the lineup was much stronger with Drew and Middlebrooks in the lineup the last two months than it would have been had Iggy been in for either of them. I'm not going to repost the numbers, but both Drew and Middlebrooks hit considerably better than Iggy did those last two months, and both were key in a couple of wins each. That also was important in helping the Sox pull away and get the homefield advantage.
We don't know what would have happened without the trade. What we do know is that the Peavy trade had a tremendous positive domino effect that went beyond his individual performance.
And we know two more things:
Iggy made two errors that helped the Sox win two game.
Drew's defense was outstanding and might have helped save a game or two. And his one error early in the playoffs had no negative effect.