Re: Impact of injuries vs. trades
posted at 8/25/2014 2:00 PM EDT
In response to ADG's comment:
In response to hill55's comment:
The title hopes of many teams have been dashed when a pitching staff is decimated by injuries.
Is the overall impact on a team any different when a pitching staff is decimated by trades?
Would the remaining players have responded any differently if the Red Sox had lost Jon Lester, John Lackey, Jake Peavy, Felix Doubront and Andrew Miller to injuries instead of to trades? Would the Sox be more likely to rally if the absent players were on a nearby disabled list instead of competing for opposing clubs?
Many factors could contribute to the current listless state of the Red Sox but I wonder about the psychological impact of the front office's deliberate decison to gut the pitching staff.
It was gutted, but Doubront was junk, Peavey is a free agent to be and they got a great package for him, Lackey was questionable, but they got a good package for him, Lester was going to walk at this point anyway but they got a great #4 hitter. Miller was the only trade I questioned, but I'm not privy to what the contract negotiations (if any) were like with him.
I like Miller and wish we'd extended him, but that deal might actually turn out the best of all...we traded 2 months of a reliever approaching free agency for a LHP pitching prospect who is almost a year younger than Henry Owens and has been dominating Double-A since the trade.
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.