Farrell has the last word on the Reddick-Bailey trade

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Drewski5. Show Drewski5's posts

    Re: Farrell has the last word on the Reddick-Bailey trade

    In response to tom-uk's comment:

     I agree that Snakeoil calling Reddick very average is a bit of an exaggeration; however, I completely agreee w/ teh supposition of his post.

    So let's meet in the middle.

    Reddick is an above average player, who is very replacable.  Fair?



    I think many fans undervalue defense.  I was not keen on him after his poor 2010, Soxprospects (Boom) was right, he is one hell of an athlete.

    I would say Reddick is very hard to replace.

    •  He is 25yo and hits FA in 2017.
    • Bill James .781 (2013)
    • 3rd best defender at any position in MLB ('12)
    • wRC+ '10 AAA (102), '11 (107), '12 (108)
    • at 25yo his best assets baserunning and defense are not going anywhere.

    Some will say WAR is junk, and the defensive portion or WAR is total junk.  I'd say (like Reddick) it has its flaws but is the best metric we have.

    On a WAR/game basis over 2011 and 2012 look where JR ranks amongst some OF in the press this offseason:

    Bourn  10.5 / 313   .034

    Melky  8.8 / 268   .033

    Victorino  9.2 / 286   .032

    C Young  7.4 / 257   .029

    JUpton  8.9 /309   .029

    Reddick  6.7 / 243   .028

    Hunter  7.9 / 296  .027

    Swisher  7.7 / 298   .026

    BJ Upton  7.5 / 299  .025

     



    You can find a good defensive outfielder, though.  Sweeney was one.  JD Drew was one.  Victorino is one.  Bradley Jr will be one.  Kalish is okay.  Crisp was one.  Ellsbury is one.  Crawford.

    Finding good defensive OF never seems to be a problem.  Finding HRs is, and sometimes we need to sacrifice D for HRs.

 
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from tom-uk. Show tom-uk's posts

    Re: Farrell has the last word on the Reddick-Bailey trade

    On a WAR/game basis over 2011 and 2012 look where JR ranks amongst some OF in the press this offseason:

    Bourn  10.5 / 313   .034

    Melky  8.8 / 268   .033

    Victorino  9.2 / 286   .032

    C Young  7.4 / 257   .029

    JUpton  8.9 /309   .029

    Reddick  6.7 / 243   .028

    Hunter  7.9 / 296  .027

    Swisher  7.7 / 298   .026

    BJ Upton  7.5 / 299  .025

     

    [/QUOTE]

    You can find a good defensive outfielder, though.  Sweeney was one.  JD Drew was one.  Victorino is one.  Bradley Jr will be one.  Kalish is okay.  Crisp was one.  Ellsbury is one.  Crawford.

    Finding good defensive OF never seems to be a problem.  Finding HRs is, and sometimes we need to sacrifice D for HRs.

    [/QUOTE]

    I wasn't against the move at the time because of Kalish, but I think all would agree that finding a RP like Bailey who had 90 IP in 2010 plus '11 is much much less of a problem.  

    Crisp and Crawford were elite fielders before 29yo and not since.  JD was also very good defensively when young.   

    Reddick is in those prime years now and probably for the next 4 years or so, and they look like four very valuable years to the A's to me.   How much FA money and/or trade value do the other guys in the list above have?  LOADS.

    Assits   / games started:

    JD Drew '07 - '11   18 in 547

    Ellsbury  MLB  16 in 548

    Reddick  MLB  21 in 230

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from Schumpeters-Ghost. Show Schumpeters-Ghost's posts

    Re: Farrell has the last word on the Reddick-Bailey trade

    In response to SinceYaz's comment:


    A simple question:  Do you ever move on? 

    Another simple question:  Do you enjoy living in the shadow of misery?




    It's a baseball discussion board, for heaven's sake!

    The idea of moving on goes against every tradition of discussing baseball. 

    I could start a thread about whether a trade of Ted Williams for Joe Dimaggio would have resulted in better careers for both players - and we could argue for months about that. 

    We could argue for years about why John McNamara started Al Nipper in Game 4 of the 1986 world series.  (STUPID MOVE Mac!!)

    It's a baseball discussion board, numbskull!

    By design - we are supposed to argue and NEVER solve anything.

    That endless disagreement is SUPPOSED to be fun.  If YOU are miserable - that is YOUR problem.  I am not miserable.

    So am I going to stop discussing baseball on a baseball board?  Nope.  At some point, I would love to discuss why the Sox didn't keep John Tudor.

    It's a baseball  discussion board!

    You people who get worked up about other people's opinions?  You are insane.  And I guarantee no one wants you at their New Year's Eve party.

    So Yes - when Reddick has a better year this year _ I am all over it.  If reddick is terrible - you don't think it;s gonna get brought up?  Of course it is!!

    It's a baseball discussion board!

     

     

     
  • This post has been removed.

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from Schumpeters-Ghost. Show Schumpeters-Ghost's posts

    Re: Farrell has the last word on the Reddick-Bailey trade

    In response to EdithBRTN's comment:

    Schumpeter, why do you put words into Farrell's mouth that he never said? You lied in order to foster debate. We want truth to begin with here - not outright lies. Farrell never made any comment whatsoever about the Reddick for Bailey trade. Yes, it is a baseball discussion but it should be based on facts that are true. You violated that. Many posters were gentlemen and held back opinion or else excused your apparent senility. Don't BS us.

    And you do live in the shadow of misery. You are constantly miserable, pessimistic. skeptical, morbid, and a wet blanket. Who would ever want to talk to you at a New Year's Eve Party. You are better suited to run a funeral home.




    Insane.

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from EnchiladaT. Show EnchiladaT's posts

    Re: Farrell has the last word on the Reddick-Bailey trade

    pike basically described himself rather than Schump.

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Farrell has the last word on the Reddick-Bailey trade

    Even if this looks like a bad trade now and even if it stays that way, it doesn't necessarily mean it was a dumb trade by Cherington.  First of all I'm assuming that he was given a payroll budget that had no room for Papelbon's 12.5 million.  That meant he had to go get a closer from somewhere.  Bailey had put up a few excellent seasons and he was young and relatively cheap.  I'm also assuming that the Red Sox had decided they preferred Kalish over Reddick long-term.  So from there it was a pretty logical move.  Some trades you lose because they're just bad moves, others are bad luck.

     
  • Sections
    Shortcuts

    Share