LaRouche for Kotchman Trade....why???

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

    Re: LaRouche for Kotchman Trade....why???

    In response to georom4's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to southpaw777's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to pinstripezac's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Leftymcrighty's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    .

    Remember when we were told that AGon would be worth 45-50 HRs going to left?

    [/QUOTE]


    who can forget

    those fancy charts where they

    had fenway overlapping petco field

    [/QUOTE]


    Those charts also showed quite a few being taken away from him being more of a line drive hitter.

    [/QUOTE]

    do those charts show him not giving a rats behind about winning or crying about the "ace" being left in a game too long?  good riddance...what a disaster....

    [/QUOTE]


    Or crying because they played too many Sunday night games. Yeah, Im glad hes gone too.

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

    Re: LaRouche for Kotchman Trade....why???

    Any team that uses the idea that there is no way you can keep a guy parttime who should be fulltime is making an awfully broad assumption. Mike Aviles went from parttime to fulltime almost out of necessity from the time he got to the Sox in 2011. Scott Podsednik twice got stretches of fulltime when at one point the team had 6 outfielders ahead of him. 

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from snakeoil123. Show snakeoil123's posts

    Re: LaRouche for Kotchman Trade....why???

    In response to Schumpeters-Ghost's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Shouldn't we all wait at least another decade before evaluating this trade?

    [/QUOTE]

    Let it go.  It will be okay.

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

    Re: LaRouche for Kotchman Trade....why???

    In response to dannycater's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Any team that uses the idea that there is no way you can keep a guy parttime who should be fulltime is making an awfully broad assumption. Mike Aviles went from parttime to fulltime almost out of necessity from the time he got to the Sox in 2011. Scott Podsednik twice got stretches of fulltime when at one point the team had 6 outfielders ahead of him. 

    [/QUOTE]


    I read something where they said that Laroche is the kind of player that needs to play daily to be the best he can. Some players dont do well in a bench role. hes one. That, and I think teams have some respect for players...

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

    Re: LaRouche for Kotchman Trade....why???

    Almost every player in MLB wants to be a fulltime player, ask Shoppach. You don't trade guys based on what a player wants, doesn't want. That's why they have contracts. The team decides what to do with talent. Some guys don't know they are good as a platoon until they are used as a platoon. 

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

    Re: LaRouche for Kotchman Trade....why???

    In response to dannycater's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Almost every player in MLB wants to be a fulltime player, ask Shoppach. You don't trade guys based on what a player wants, doesn't want. That's why they have contracts. The team decides what to do with talent. Some guys don't know they are good as a platoon until they are used as a platoon. 

    [/QUOTE]


    I understand that, but Laroche is a legit FT player. Shoppach isnt and never has been. It would be different if he was a guy who was a platoon player and just wanted his shot. Hes always been a FT player that produces and is a solid defender. It just makes for a bad vibe in the clubhouse. besides that whole fiasco didnt make any sense anyway.

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

    Re: LaRouche for Kotchman Trade....why???

    The Sox got LaRoche with an idea in mind. He's not the manager. You play when you are told to play. End of story.

     
  8. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: LaRouche for Kotchman Trade....why???

    In response to dannycater's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    On LaRoche, I remember all. 

    Here's Theo

    1. Number 1 goal to get AGON by 2012 pre-season

    2. No intention to keep Beltre, none, no matter that he was a fan favorite and one of the best 3rd basemen in the game who loved hitting in Fenway.

    3. Youks was going to play 3b even  though he had turned into a terrific defensive 1b. No intention to replace Youks cuz of his contract. Fast forward, and they couldn't get rid of him fast enough. 

    4. Overpays for CC, overpays for Lackey, gives Beckett 50 mil extension for absolutely no reason at all, with no basis of performance behind it. 

    .....LaRoche never had to be traded. If he sits on the Sox bench, who cares that he sits on the Sox bench. Injuries and other factors always seems to allow for guys to thrive, guys to get a ton of at bats. Happened with Reddick, happened with the OFs last year. If the fear factor is a guy sitting on a bench, if he's hitting the way LaRoche hit in his short stint, he NEVER GETS TO THE BENCH.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    'The way he's hitting'?  Are you talking about the 1 HR and .263 OBP?

    And if we wanted LaRoche, why didn't we just sign him after the season?  I don't remember a single person wanting to sign him, which makes sense, SINCE HE DIDN'T HAVE A POSITION TO PLAY.

    So the game plan here was to pay him $2.3M+, let him sit on the bench, have him complain that we were killing his market value, and then say adios, thanks for keeping the bench warm?

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

    Re: LaRouche for Kotchman Trade....why???

    In response to dannycater's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Any team that uses the idea that there is no way you can keep a guy parttime who should be fulltime is making an awfully broad assumption. Mike Aviles went from parttime to fulltime almost out of necessity from the time he got to the Sox in 2011. Scott Podsednik twice got stretches of fulltime when at one point the team had 6 outfielders ahead of him. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Aviles can't be compared to LaRoche.  We were going to keep Aviles around as long as we had control years.  He made it possible to part with Scutaro's salary.  The only value LaRoche had was as a trading chip.

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

    Re: LaRouche for Kotchman Trade....why???

    In response to southpaw777's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to dannycater's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Almost every player in MLB wants to be a fulltime player, ask Shoppach. You don't trade guys based on what a player wants, doesn't want. That's why they have contracts. The team decides what to do with talent. Some guys don't know they are good as a platoon until they are used as a platoon. 

    [/QUOTE]


    I understand that, but Laroche is a legit FT player. Shoppach isnt and never has been. It would be different if he was a guy who was a platoon player and just wanted his shot. Hes always been a FT player that produces and is a solid defender. It just makes for a bad vibe in the clubhouse. besides that whole fiasco didnt make any sense anyway.

    [/QUOTE]

    It only made sense from a 'used car lot' perspective.  We acquired an asset no one in the league wanted, and essentially paid nothing for him.  We flipped him for a player we thought had more value.

    At the end of the day, it was Strickland and Diaz for Kotchman.  That alone makes it a great deal, but then we flipped Kotchman for Hall, who had a great season for us.

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

    Re: LaRouche for Kotchman Trade....why???

    In response to georom4's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I guess i could google it and get some answer but Im more interested in the varied opinions on BDC....

    Adam was sent packing after a short stint....we traded two players fro him if i recall and he was hitting the cover off the ball....

    but...

    he was sent packing....I recall one game where it seemed that he was not liked/accepted by his new teammates...i forget the play or the game but i remember thinking the reaction to him was odd (because it was a hit i believe)...anyways the memory grows fuzzy.....it was obvious to me that he didnt fit well with the team....anyone else have more details or facts? 

    and if that was indeed the case, what about his future prospects?

    good stuff!

    [/QUOTE]


    Can't tell you anything about incidentals but I thought it was a strange move.  Then the next season, the all field Kotchman turned into a Sox killer with his bat at TB...

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from AL34. Show AL34's posts

    Re: LaRouche for Kotchman Trade....why???

    I never understood that move by Theo in 2009. Casey Kotchman althogh good defensively never could hit and I was always perplexed as to why they traded Adam LaRoche that quickly after getting him from Pittsburg.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from AL34. Show AL34's posts

    Re: LaRouche for Kotchman Trade....why???

    What ruined Agon was that stupid homerun hitting contest at the Allstar game. He did it with a sugically repaired shoulder and was never the same player in the second half of 2011. The Red Sox Medical Staff should have prevented him from participating in that event in 2011.

     

    In response to Flapjack07's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Leftymcrighty's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Just a mystifying move then and in retrospect. Laroche is a plus fielder, so why pop gunner Kothchman?

    Laroche hit a couple of homers in his short stay. He would have been cheaper at 1st base than Gonzalez. Irony is, he showed he could use the wall better in a couple of weeks, than AGon did in his whole stay here.

    Remember when we were told that AGon would be worth 45-50 HRs going to left?

    [/QUOTE]

    I think somebody on here suggested 60 HR was not out of reach.


    Ahh, the days of A-Gon hysteria...how short-lived they were.

    [/QUOTE]


     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from georom4. Show georom4's posts

    Re: LaRouche for Kotchman Trade....why???

    pike....you dont trade a superior player for a lesser one because of their desired playing time...that makes no sense

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

    Re: LaRouche for Kotchman Trade....why???

    LaRoche for Kotchman was a bad move, plain and simple IMO.  And I will bet you Theo Epstein would tell you the same thing if you asked him now.  Say what you want about Epstein but he's been pretty candid about some of his mistakes.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSoxKimmi. Show RedSoxKimmi's posts

    Re: LaRouche for Kotchman Trade....why???

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Unbelievably dumb!  WE have this player who is too good to come off the bench, so we are going to trade him straight up for a lesser player.  Really?  You couldnt get them to throw in a prospect?  Really?

    Lesser player, better contract.  2 months of letting LaRoche sit on the bench for $7M, or 1 year two months of Kotchman, at only $3M.

    [/QUOTE]

    Besides Kotchman having a better contract and being a better fit for the team once VMart was obtained, I don't think the Sox necessarily thought they were getting a lesser player.  They were upgrading defensively, and at the time of the trade, Kotchman's slash line was .282/.354/.409/.764 versus Laroche's which was .248/.326/.446/.772 .

     

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSoxKimmi. Show RedSoxKimmi's posts

    Re: LaRouche for Kotchman Trade....why???

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    LaRoche for Kotchman was a bad move, plain and simple IMO.  And I will bet you Theo Epstein would tell you the same thing if you asked him now.  Say what you want about Epstein but he's been pretty candid about some of his mistakes.

    [/QUOTE]


    Hindsight aside, I don't think it was a clear cut bad move.  I can understand people questioning it, but I can also see the logic behind Theo making the move.

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

    Re: LaRouche for Kotchman Trade....why???

    In response to RedSoxKimmi's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Besides Kotchman having a better contract and being a better fit for the team once VMart was obtained, I don't think the Sox necessarily thought they were getting a lesser player.  They were upgrading defensively, and at the time of the trade, Kotchman's slash line was .282/.354/.409/.764 versus Laroche's which was .248/.326/.446/.772 .

    [/QUOTE]

    Good points, Kimmi.  However I would submit that LaRoche is one of the classic second-half hitters.  For his career he has an .886 OPS post-ASB vs. .768 pre-ASB.

    Happy Holidays, Kimmi.  Always nice to see you posting here.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSoxKimmi. Show RedSoxKimmi's posts

    Re: LaRouche for Kotchman Trade....why???

    "Good points, Kimmi. However I would submit that LaRoche is one of the classic second-half hitters. For his career he has an .886 OPS post-ASB vs. .768 pre-ASB.

    Happy Holidays, Kimmi. Always nice to see you posting here."

    Fair enough Bob.

    Thanks, and Happy Holidays to you.   :-)

     

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

    Re: LaRouche for Kotchman Trade....why???

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to RedSoxKimmi's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Besides Kotchman having a better contract and being a better fit for the team once VMart was obtained, I don't think the Sox necessarily thought they were getting a lesser player.  They were upgrading defensively, and at the time of the trade, Kotchman's slash line was .282/.354/.409/.764 versus Laroche's which was .248/.326/.446/.772 .

    [/QUOTE]

    Good points, Kimmi.  However I would submit that LaRoche is one of the classic second-half hitters.  For his career he has an .886 OPS post-ASB vs. .768 pre-ASB.

    Happy Holidays, Kimmi.  Always nice to see you posting here.

    [/QUOTE]


    Exactly.  A first half comparison ignores LaRoche's second half awesomeness and the success he expereienced here in a short stint.

    LaRoche is finally starting to receive the respect he deserves; however, he was a humble / hard working /  underrated ballplayer for most of his career.  People say that 2012 was an abberration.  However, the only difference between 2012 and his other years, was that he played like he always does in the second half in the first half.

    On a 2 yr deal: LaRoche would give you .270, 25-30 HR, good D.  He's an above average all around first baseman.

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

    Re: LaRouche for Kotchman Trade....why???

    LaRoche career 2nd half stats:

    1847 AB, .293 BA, .886 OPS, 103 HR.

    LaRoche 2012 stats: .853 OPS, .271 BA, 571 at-bats.

    His full year 2012 doesnt even match his career second half stats.  Thats what kind of second half hitter hes historically been.  Its too bad that it took him until 32 yrs old to remedy his tendancy of starting slowly.

    He'd be a good signing on a 2 yr deal, as would napoli.

     

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

    Re: LaRouche for Kotchman Trade....why???

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to RedSoxKimmi's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Besides Kotchman having a better contract and being a better fit for the team once VMart was obtained, I don't think the Sox necessarily thought they were getting a lesser player.  They were upgrading defensively, and at the time of the trade, Kotchman's slash line was .282/.354/.409/.764 versus Laroche's which was .248/.326/.446/.772 .

    [/QUOTE]

    Good points, Kimmi.  However I would submit that LaRoche is one of the classic second-half hitters.  For his career he has an .886 OPS post-ASB vs. .768 pre-ASB.

    Happy Holidays, Kimmi.  Always nice to see you posting here.

    [/QUOTE]

    There is still the issue of where he would play.  Neither Youk nor Papi were sitting.

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

    Re: LaRouche for Kotchman Trade....why???

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    There is still the issue of where he would play.  Neither Youk nor Papi were sitting.

    [/QUOTE]

    True enough.  I think of it as a strange sequence of moves.  You trade for LaRoche, then after a few games you trade him for an inferior player.  That's a strange way to do things.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share