Hazelbaker traded

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

    Hazelbaker traded

    To the Dodgers for outfielder Alex Castellanos.

     

    Eh.

     

    Oh and Beato wss DFA'd

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from mrmojo1120. Show mrmojo1120's posts

    Re: Hazelbaker traded

    Sorry,I posted a thread about this after you did.

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

    Re: Hazelbaker traded

    Similar profile, had a good minor league career, faltered at the MLB level but never really got a long look. He's got some speed, some pop and can play half the positions on the diamond. 

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from BMav. Show BMav's posts

    Re: Hazelbaker traded


    Seems like the key reason for the trade is the righty-lefty factor. With Nava-Carp-Hassan-Kalish they probably thought Hazelbaker was 5th on the lefty corner OF totem pole. Sixth behind Bradley if we resign Ellsbury. Hazelbaker is also a pull hitter without much patience, which is not a great fit for the Red Sox. Castellanos also has some utility versatility that might be useful, especially if we trade Middlebrooks. Finally, they probably feel Hazelbaker was a prime candidate to be drafted in the rule 5 draft and Castellanos is not. Call it a 1-0 trade from a rule 5 stand point.

     

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

    Re: Hazelbaker traded

    In response to BMav's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Seems like the key reason for the trade is the righty-lefty factor. With Nava-Carp-Hassan-Kalish they probably thought Hazelbaker was 5th on the lefty corner OF totem pole. Sixth behind Bradley if we resign Ellsbury. Hazelbaker is also a pull hitter without much patience, which is not a great fit for the Red Sox. Castellanos also has some utility versatility that might be useful, especially if we trade Middlebrooks. Finally, they probably feel Hazelbaker was a prime candidate to be drafted in the rule 5 draft and Castellanos is not. Call it a 1-0 trade from a rule 5 stand point.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    That's what it was: get something before we lose him to rule 5 for nothing.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from ctredsoxfanhugh. Show ctredsoxfanhugh's posts

    Re: Hazelbaker traded

    I concur, it was a depth move.  Not the sexy trade fans want to see but when you manage a whole organization you have to field a team at all levels.  If a worst case scenario ever happens and you need to dip into your depth it's nice to have a guy that is a versatile player.  

     
  7. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Hazelbaker traded

    Doesn't it seem odd to announce such a minor transaction at such a moment?  I loathe - but can understand - the public Boras/ARod Opt-out decision during the Sox' WS moment in 2007.  But why this, why now?  

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

    Re: Hazelbaker traded

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BMav's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Seems like the key reason for the trade is the righty-lefty factor. With Nava-Carp-Hassan-Kalish they probably thought Hazelbaker was 5th on the lefty corner OF totem pole. Sixth behind Bradley if we resign Ellsbury. Hazelbaker is also a pull hitter without much patience, which is not a great fit for the Red Sox. Castellanos also has some utility versatility that might be useful, especially if we trade Middlebrooks. Finally, they probably feel Hazelbaker was a prime candidate to be drafted in the rule 5 draft and Castellanos is not. Call it a 1-0 trade from a rule 5 stand point.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    That's what it was: get something before we lose him to rule 5 for nothing.

    [/QUOTE]

    Well, the have to add Castellanos to the 40 man, too, just as they could have added Hazelbaker.

     

    No idea why the move, but comments on mlbtr refer to Castellanos as the Dodgers #11 prospect before the season...

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from ctredsoxfanhugh. Show ctredsoxfanhugh's posts

    Re: Hazelbaker traded

    In response to SonicsMonksLyresVicars' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Doesn't it seem odd to announce such a minor transaction at such a moment?  I loathe - but can understand - the public Boras/ARod Opt-out decision during the Sox' WS moment in 2007.  But why this, why now?  

    [/QUOTE]

    Normally trades are announced at some point right after they happen, small transactions happen year round.

     
  11. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Hazelbaker traded

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BMav's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Seems like the key reason for the trade is the righty-lefty factor. With Nava-Carp-Hassan-Kalish they probably thought Hazelbaker was 5th on the lefty corner OF totem pole. Sixth behind Bradley if we resign Ellsbury. Hazelbaker is also a pull hitter without much patience, which is not a great fit for the Red Sox. Castellanos also has some utility versatility that might be useful, especially if we trade Middlebrooks. Finally, they probably feel Hazelbaker was a prime candidate to be drafted in the rule 5 draft and Castellanos is not. Call it a 1-0 trade from a rule 5 stand point.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    That's what it was: get something before we lose him to rule 5 for nothing.

    [/QUOTE]


    Yup. we should see these kind of trades throughout the winter, amongst other ones.

    Haze was not coming to Boston anytime soon because hes LH. Besides looking overmatched vs some AAA pitching, Not much patience either. Late inning replacement/pinch runner type in this organization.

    Did anyone else not realize at first the name was Alex, not Nick Castellanos when they read the article on MLBTR?

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from ctredsoxfanhugh. Show ctredsoxfanhugh's posts

    Re: Hazelbaker traded

    In response to southpaw777's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BMav's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Seems like the key reason for the trade is the righty-lefty factor. With Nava-Carp-Hassan-Kalish they probably thought Hazelbaker was 5th on the lefty corner OF totem pole. Sixth behind Bradley if we resign Ellsbury. Hazelbaker is also a pull hitter without much patience, which is not a great fit for the Red Sox. Castellanos also has some utility versatility that might be useful, especially if we trade Middlebrooks. Finally, they probably feel Hazelbaker was a prime candidate to be drafted in the rule 5 draft and Castellanos is not. Call it a 1-0 trade from a rule 5 stand point.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    That's what it was: get something before we lose him to rule 5 for nothing.

    [/QUOTE]


    Yup. we should see these kind of trades throughout the winter, amongst other ones.

    Haze was not coming to Boston anytime soon because hes LH. Besides looking overmatched vs some AAA pitching, Not much patience either. Late inning replacement/pinch runner type in this organization.

    Did anyone else not realize at first the name was Alex, not Nick Castellanos when they read the article on MLBTR?

    [/QUOTE]

    I think you meant it was Nick...and not Alex Castellanos.  Nick being a highly regarded prospect in the Tigers organization.  Which would be a bit peculiar for the tigers to trade away such a good prospect right after we took them out of the playoffs. 

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from ctredsoxfanhugh. Show ctredsoxfanhugh's posts

    Re: Hazelbaker traded

    but yes I did notice that.....and got kinda excited. 

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

    Re: Hazelbaker traded

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to southpaw777's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BMav's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Seems like the key reason for the trade is the righty-lefty factor. With Nava-Carp-Hassan-Kalish they probably thought Hazelbaker was 5th on the lefty corner OF totem pole. Sixth behind Bradley if we resign Ellsbury. Hazelbaker is also a pull hitter without much patience, which is not a great fit for the Red Sox. Castellanos also has some utility versatility that might be useful, especially if we trade Middlebrooks. Finally, they probably feel Hazelbaker was a prime candidate to be drafted in the rule 5 draft and Castellanos is not. Call it a 1-0 trade from a rule 5 stand point.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    That's what it was: get something before we lose him to rule 5 for nothing.

    [/QUOTE]


    Yup. we should see these kind of trades throughout the winter, amongst other ones.

    Haze was not coming to Boston anytime soon because hes LH. Besides looking overmatched vs some AAA pitching, Not much patience either. Late inning replacement/pinch runner type in this organization.

    Did anyone else not realize at first the name was Alex, not Nick Castellanos when they read the article on MLBTR?

    [/QUOTE]

    I think you meant it was Nick...and not Alex Castellanos.  Nick being a highly regarded prospect in the Tigers organization.  Which would be a bit peculiar for the tigers to trade away such a good prospect right after we took them out of the playoffs. 

    [/QUOTE]


    Thats what I said...Maybe it was worded funny. I tend to do that sometimes ;)

     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Flapjack07. Show Flapjack07's posts

    Re: Hazelbaker traded

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:

    Similar profile, had a good minor league career, faltered at the MLB level but never really got a long look. He's got some speed, some pop and can play half the positions on the diamond. 




    Good little pickup. The minor league numbers look pretty nice, and it can never hurt to stock up on a few depth guys like this...never know who might be the next Darnell McDonald or Ciriaco or Mortensen who's going to pitch in and contribute when you least expect it and most need it.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share