2013 Off Season Rebuttal

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: 2013 Off Season Rebuttal

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    In response to emp9's comment:

    In a nutshell,   Signings I was in favor of:  Victorino Napoli Hanrahan Dempster   Signings i didn't like: Drew Ross Gomes   Not to say I don't like these players, but i thought SS, BckpC, LF were all positions they could have filled from within, then go hard after Anibal Sanchez. ( i know the arguments based on last year's team at the end or 1/3 of the end of it ).    I don't want to get into the money side of it ( that would be a different conversation ), except that i thought that filling those positions from w/in wld justify a big contract signing. And i have to admit, i tend to forgive bad signings when it has to do w/ pitching, especially ones based on career performance ( see Hanrahan i guess ).    So yeah. As GM, i would have advocated for a revolving door at nearly 3 positions to sign more effective starting pitching. 

     

     

     



    I really liked Sanchez, and his 195+ IP for 3 straight years showed he had become more reliable than many here seemed to think he was.

     

    I was not big on trying to sign Lackey years ago, but when they gxot him for less than what I expected him to sign for, I liked the deal for the same reason you mention. trying to upgrade the rotation from the middle up part vs continually seeking better 5th starters in hopse one blossums on our watch is a forgivable gamble.

    Had we put all our eggs in two baskets: J Upton and A Sanchez, who really knows if we'd have a better record right now, but my position was that these guys would still be here in 2015 and beyond (assuming an Upton extension).

    We also will never know if these two would have put up the same numbers in this rough environment.

    Ben's plan has worked thus far. I hope it continues, but I have serious doubts. Of course, after a nice start, the odds have improved on making the playoffs, and my 83-85 win projection may turn out low.

     

     




    Upton is a FA after 2015. IMO, you cant assume an extension right now when he knows he can get a HUGE deal in 3 years, probably worth more than hes offered now. I got a question for you Moon. Do you think it would be better to spend the $$, make a play for him and get him in his prime for the next 6 years (28-34 yrs old) after 2015, or give up valuable farm pieces and have him leave when he hits his prime? Just wanted to pose that question to you since I believe we are in a "bridge" period over the next 2 years waiting for the prospects to develop. By 2015 we should be over it and Upton will be available. I would really want to make an aggressive play for him after the 2015 season if he proves over the next 3 years he can be consistent and worth it. His numbers still have question marks this year.

     

    Having JBJ in CF, Upton in RF and maybe even Bogaerts in LF would be an unbelievable OF

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: 2013 Off Season Rebuttal

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    J. Upton got off to a flying start, but I'm still not sure I like this guy.  He's got 12 HR but only 21 RBI.  A quick look at his splits shows the reason:

    Bases empty 333/443/815

    Men on base 178/304/289

     



    Upton is a long-term deal, so it is way too early to speculate.  And someone like Upton is way more inconsistent tham most.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: 2013 Off Season Rebuttal

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    I understand the Lester/Myers deal under those circumstances. I think KC would have had to give us more than that though for 2 years of Lester and another prospect because I value an accomplished LHP more than an unknown OF prospect. But more to the point, I agree that the deal makes more sense if they were indeed going for the "Big Change".

    Remember Tb gave Davis too, and got some other nice prospects in return with Myers (Montgomery, Leonard, and Odorizzi).  I think Lester and a prospect could have gotten us Myers and Butler or Gordon- maybe even all three if we threw in Doubront and a prospect like I suggested at the time.

    Remember, I was only for trading Lester, if we were not going to extend him.

     



    We wouldn't have gotten any more for Lester.  Both Shields and Lester have 2014 options.  And Lester has slightly more upside, but had a poor 2012.  I doubt KC would've paid full freight coming off a poor season.  I expected Lester to come back, but if I had to bet, at the time the trade was made, on who would have a better 2013, I'd have bet on Shields without a second thought.

    Past that, had we made the trade, that would be tantamount to giving up on 2013 and 2014.  Still, I can't say it wouldn't have gotten my attention.  It was a mighty attractive package.

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: 2013 Off Season Rebuttal

    Upton is a FA after 2015. IMO, you cant assume an extension right now when he knows he can get a HUGE deal in 3 years, probably worth more than hes offered now.

    As I said any time I suggested a deal for Upton: I do not make the deal unless an extension is agreed upon. No extension: no deal.

     

    I got a question for you Moon. Do you think it would be better to spend the $$, make a play for him and get him in his prime for the next 6 years (28-34 yrs old) after 2015, or give up valuable farm pieces and have him leave when he hits his prime? Just wanted to pose that question to you since I believe we are in a "bridge" period over the next 2 years waiting for the prospects to develop. By 2015 we should be over it and Upton will be available. I would really want to make an aggressive play for him after the 2015 season if he proves over the next 3 years he can be consistent and worth it. His numbers still have question marks this year.

    I'd like to sign him as a FA rather than trade prospects, but my point in suggesting the trade was based on making sure we get him, and being competitive before 2015. I did not think the plan Ben chose made us competitive now or in 2014, and worst of all, did nothing to strengthen us in 2015 and beyond.

     

    Having JBJ in CF, Upton in RF and maybe even Bogaerts in LF would be an unbelievable OF.

    I have Bogaerts at 3B and Middlebrooks at 1B by 2015.

     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: 2013 Off Season Rebuttal

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    Upton is a FA after 2015. IMO, you cant assume an extension right now when he knows he can get a HUGE deal in 3 years, probably worth more than hes offered now.

    As I said any time I suggested a deal for Upton: I do not make the deal unless an extension is agreed upon. No extension: no deal.

     

    I got a question for you Moon. Do you think it would be better to spend the $$, make a play for him and get him in his prime for the next 6 years (28-34 yrs old) after 2015, or give up valuable farm pieces and have him leave when he hits his prime? Just wanted to pose that question to you since I believe we are in a "bridge" period over the next 2 years waiting for the prospects to develop. By 2015 we should be over it and Upton will be available. I would really want to make an aggressive play for him after the 2015 season if he proves over the next 3 years he can be consistent and worth it. His numbers still have question marks this year.

    I'd like to sign him as a FA rather than trade prospects, but my point in suggesting the trade was based on making sure we get him, and being competitive before 2015. I did not think the plan Ben chose made us competitive now or in 2014, and worst of all, did nothing to strengthen us in 2015 and beyond.

     

    Having JBJ in CF, Upton in RF and maybe even Bogaerts in LF would be an unbelievable OF.

    I have Bogaerts at 3B and Middlebrooks at 1B by 2015.




    It'll be fun to revisit this and see where all our prospects end up.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: 2013 Off Season Rebuttal

    AZ did not want Ellsbury. Period.

    Irrelevant, and childish bugaboo on your part. Ellsbury plus the draft compensation would have netted a 2nd rate 3rd baseman.

    Childishness is your specialty, not mine. There's no way AZ takes Ellsbury. A 3 way deal might work, but not the one you suggested. I'd have made your deal in a flash, but it was unrealistic on many levels.

     

    They would have wanted Middlebrooks, which you bashed notin for saying he'd have given him up for Upton.

    They would have wanted a lot of players, stooge, but they got a 29 year old 2nd rate 3rd baseman named Martin Prado.

    They got more than what you offered, with no Bogaerts included.

     

    It would have taken Bogaerts, who you now deny saying you would have included. You story changes by the minute. 

    False, stooge, I'm not denying anything.

    You just printed that you offered anyone but JBJ, Barnes and Bogaerts. That is a bare-faced lie.

     

    You are reacting like a balling baby. I've said, over and over, that Bogaerts should be included only if that's what it took to top the other offers.

    Yes, if you could read, that is exactly what I said you said, clown. The fact is Ben has no way of knowing every offer AZ got, and there is no way AZ takes your clownish offer without Bogaerts. They probably would have said no, even with Bogaerts. Most of us tried to tell you they'd want Middlebrooks and/or JBJ, but you wouldn't budge- as usual.

     

    It didn't take that, as the Braves didn't send their top prospect at SS or their top 2 pitching prospects.

    Because they didn't need a SS. They needed a 3Bman, something you never got then and are in denial over now with your clownish Prado comment.

     

      Wren was able to acquire Upton without having to include prized young shortstop Andrelton Simmons or either of his top two pitching prospects, Julio Teheran and J.R. Graham.

    Stooge, you are a site endorsed shill who simply spouts off the popularity button that is the pride and prejudices of most Red Sox fans.

    I did not write this, so once again, you are confusing who you are arguing against.

    Red Sox GM's don't get it, and you certainly don't get it with your constant "it's the starting pitching" nonsense. The Red Sox will continue to lose too many games where the overall pitching in good in that particular game.

    I have you down for being happy with our 3-5 starters, but it is known how you also covered all the bases by bashing Dempster and lackey, so when they fail, you can claim you were right no matter what happenes.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from notin. Show notin's posts

    Re: 2013 Off Season Rebuttal

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

    Ever-repeated and laughably bad offers of Ellsbury and some farmhands were ludicrous (and actually inferior to the package the Dbacks received

    Wrong, pal. Ellsbury plus draft compesnation plus 3 or 4 farm hands from anyone but Bradley, Barnes and Bogaerts is superior to the package the Dbacks received. Ellsbury plus draft compensation could have been converted into a 2nd rate 3rd baseman. Webster would have been part of the farm pool. I said to include Bogearts only if better offers were on the table. They weren't.

    I also said to keep AGon, and wait until Crawbust (I said to avoid him like the plage in FA) came off his all-time trade value low before trading him. I said to trade Buckett, separately, last summer.

    If this team had AGon and J. Upton, they would be a contender instead of the pretender that's now getting exposed.

    No, it's not all about the pitching. It's about both, and the Red Sox are unable to match most AL teams when it comes to slugging in the 81 games they play in one ballpark.

    Yes, the GM is incompetent.




    You repeatedly state “Ellsbury and his draft pick compensation” as if the latter is a difference maker, yet I have never once seen you acknowledge that the Diamondbacks received “Martin Prado and his draft pick compensation.  The compensation for Ellsbury is no different than what the compensation for Prado would have been  - one sandwich pick.

     

     

     

    Ellsbury plus draft compensation could have been converted into a 2nd rate 3rd baseman.”  Really?  And you don’t think that overcomplicates the deal?  Why not just get the third baseman up front?   And despite his awful start, Prado is a very good baseball player.   Of course, if we cling to the notion that he is a bad player – maybe even as bad as Ellsbury is according to you – then dealing Prado plus his draft pick compensation was an equivalent package at minimum.

     

     

    You also undervalue the pitching prospects the DBacks received.  Delgado is a very talented young arm, and Spruill has always been very highly regarded as well.  The others were less so.  Ahmed is meh, and Drury was a confusing inclusion he brings nothing to the table.  A beatable offer?  Absolutely.  An easily beatable offer by giving the other teams players they do not want and telling them “go make your own deals with this”?  Laughably bad, and Towers did exactly what he should have done – gone to get players he wanted in the first place and saved himself 10 or 20 phone calls.  This does make Ellsbury a bit of odd trade bait.   Can only get a second rate 3rd baseman, or a first rate outfielder.

     

    Or maybe, just maybe when you say "Ellsbury plus draft compensation could have been converted into a 2nd rate 3rd baseman", you are actually admitting the Diamondbacks did not want Ellsbury at all, sort of the point I was trying to drill into your head for about 5 or 6 months now.  

     

    I mean, did not want Ellbury plus his draft pick compensation.

     

Share