Martinez-Masterson Trade Revisted

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Martinez-Masterson Trade Revisted

    There were numerous posters crying about how the Sox shouldn't have traded Jed Masterson.

    So let's look at Masterson since he left.
    In 2009, he went 1-7 with a 4.55 ERA.
    In 2010, he went 6-13 with a 4.70 ERA.
    In 2011, although he went 12-10 with a 3.21 ERA, he finished 2-3 with a 5.23 ERA in his last seven starts with just two of those starts being solid starts (6 IP, 2 ER and 6 IP, 1 ER).
    In 2012, he is 0-2 with a 6.65 ERA.

    So since he left, he's pitched consistently well for jsut 4 1/2 months.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from hankwilliamsjr. Show hankwilliamsjr's posts

    Re: Martinez-Masterson Trade Revisted

    he's pithed

    Don't type when your toasting Ted Kennedy. And those are pretty good numbers when you compare him to the great Tim Wastefield. It remains to be seen how the compensation turns out for a rented Victor. Right now, it was stupid to make the deal and pass on Victor to later resign Jason Variwashedup and bean count for Carl Crawbust et al.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: Martinez-Masterson Trade Revisted

    In Response to Re: Martinez-Masterson Trade Revisted:
    he's pithed Don't type when you toasting Ted Kennedy. Posted by hankwilliamsjr


    Don't know what you're talking about.

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

    Re: Martinez-Masterson Trade Revisted

    Yes, you don't know what you are talking about when it comes to "pithed".
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Chilliwings. Show Chilliwings's posts

    Re: Martinez-Masterson Trade Revisted

    In Response to Re: Martinez-Masterson Trade Revisted:
    he's pithed Don't type when you toasting Ted Kennedy. And those are pretty good numbers when you compare him to the great Tim Wastefield. It remains to be seen how the compensation turns out for a rented Victor. Right now, it was stupid to make the deal and pass on Victor to later resign Jason Variwashedup and bean count for Carl Crawbust et al.
    Posted by hankwilliamsjr


    So you mock the obvious typo of "he's pithed" and follow it up with "when you toasting".  Brilliant.

    Even worse - have you been following Matt Barnes this spring?  Do you even know his significance to this thread?
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: Martinez-Masterson Trade Revisted

    In Response to Re: Martinez-Masterson Trade Revisted:
    he's pithed Don't type when your toasting Ted Kennedy. And those are pretty good numbers when you compare him to the great Tim Wastefield. It remains to be seen how the compensation turns out for a rented Victor. Right now, it was stupid to make the deal and pass on Victor to later resign Jason Variwashedup and bean count for Carl Crawbust et al.
    Posted by hankwilliamsjr


    It was stupid to pass on VMart for a rented Tek?  VMart's catching career basically ended the day he left the RS.  So you think it would've been smart to pay $52M for what amounts to 3 years, when we already had a DH?  Seriously?

    And you're comparing Masterson to a 40 year old #6 pitcher?
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from jimedfred. Show jimedfred's posts

    Re: Martinez-Masterson Trade Revisted

    Agreed and agreed.
     V-mart wasn't a catcher any more, but letting him go / using that money to keep Beltre would have looked much better than what did transpire. If Matt Barnes was a compensatory pick, and he succeeds in the Show someday, I'll feel much better.

    Barnes looks lights out NOW, but that's in low A ball. Remember Brien Taylor ?

    And the " book" says you never trade good young pitching. Masterson & Hagadone looked pretty promising at the time.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Chilliwings. Show Chilliwings's posts

    Re: Martinez-Masterson Trade Revisted

    Not low A ball, A ball.  And age appropriate.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: Martinez-Masterson Trade Revisted

    I don't agree with keeping Martinez. Gonzalez is better at 1B, and Ortiz is better at DH. Martinez simply wasn't a DH anymore.

    As for Beltre -- he played just four more games than Youk last year and has hamstring troubles this year. You couldn't predict Youk's injuries, but even if having Beltre last would have been better, in the long term, with Middlebrooks knocking on the door, long term, as much as I like Beltre, it was the better decision.

    Since Beltre was available down the stretch, he might have helped with some clutch hits the Sox could have used, but still, that's too much 20/20 hindsight.

    As for the Masterson trade, it was the right decision. The Sox made the playoffs in 2009 when the Sox needed catching help. In 2010, there were too many injuries. In both years, Masterson wouldn't have helped.

    The Indians could afford to be patient with Masterson struggling in the rotation in 2010, but that's something the Sox couldn't do.

    And just because a player a team trades away starts to do well, it doesn't mean it was a wrong decision. Teams trade for different reasons. The Sox were trying to fill a short-term need, which they did, while the Indians were looking at more of a long-term need.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from jimedfred. Show jimedfred's posts

    Re: Martinez-Masterson Trade Revisted

    In Response to Re: Martinez-Masterson Trade Revisted:
    I don't agree with keeping Martinez. Gonzalez is better at 1B, and Ortiz is better at DH. Martinez simply wasn't a DH anymore. As for Beltre -- he played just four more games than Youk last year and has hamstring troubles this year. You couldn't predict Youk's injuries, but even if having Beltre last would have been better, in the long term, with Middlebrooks knocking on the door, long term, as much as I like Beltre, it was the better decision. Since Beltre was available down the stretch, he might have helped with some clutch hits the Sox could have used, but still, that's too much 20/20 hindsight. As for the Masterson trade, it was the right decision. The Sox made the playoffs in 2009 when the Sox needed catching help. In 2010, there were too many injuries. In both years, Masterson wouldn't have helped. The Indians could afford to be patient with Masterson struggling in the rotation in 2010, but that's something the Sox couldn't do. And just because a player a team trades away starts to do well, it doesn't mean it was a wrong decision. Teams trade for different reasons. The Sox were trying to fill a short-term need, which they did, while the Indians were looking at more of a long-term need.
    Posted by royf19

    Wow ! A thoughtful, intelligent and reasoned post. Did I wander over to SOSH by mistake ? Roy, I agree with you.
    Keep it up and trolls will descend upon you.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: Martinez-Masterson Trade Revisted

    In Response to Re: Martinez-Masterson Trade Revisted:
    In Response to Re: Martinez-Masterson Trade Revisted : Wow ! A thoughtful, intelligent and reasoned post. Did I wander over to SOSH by mistake ? Roy, I agree with you. Keep it up and trolls will descend upon you.
    Posted by jimedfred


    THat's what's ashame about this board. There are so many topics where two people can disagree but have reasonable points to make and have interesting discussions.

    Too many posters are either not interested or get their ego wrapped up in their opinion. That's why I pick and choose who I respond to and what I respond to.

    The irony of the Beltre issue is that as much as I like Youk, I'm don't think I would have argued had the Sox kept Beltre and traded Youk, because I was a big fan of Beltre's defense.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from AL34. Show AL34's posts

    Re: Martinez-Masterson Trade Revisted

    I Always liked Masterson but I loved V Mart a switch hitter. I just wished they had hung onto him. Masterson was a good reliever. n response to "Martinez-Masterson Trade Revisted":
    There were numerous posters crying about how the Sox shouldn't have traded Jed Masterson. So let's look at Masterson since he left. In 2009, he went 1-7 with a 4.55 ERA. In 2010, he went 6-13 with a 4.70 ERA. In 2011, although he went 12-10 with a 3.21 ERA, he finished 2-3 with a 5.23 ERA in his last seven starts with just two of those starts being solid starts (6 IP, 2 ER and 6 IP, 1 ER). In 2012, he is 0-2 with a 6.65 ERA. So since he left, he's pitched consistently well for jsut 4 1/2 months. Posted by royf19
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from LloydDobler. Show LloydDobler's posts

    Re: Martinez-Masterson Trade Revisted

    In Response to Re: Martinez-Masterson Trade Revisted:
    In Response to Re: Martinez-Masterson Trade Revisted : So you mock the obvious typo of "he's pithed" and follow it up with "when you toasting".  Brilliant. Posted by Chilliwings


    Classic!! Even funnier, he's since edited it ... to your!
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: Martinez-Masterson Trade Revisted

    In Response to Re: Martinez-Masterson Trade Revisted:
    In Response to Re: Martinez-Masterson Trade Revisted : Classic!! Even funnier, he's since edited it ... to your!
    Posted by LloydDobler


    What's even funnier is Prof. Softy didn't catch my other typo where I typed jsut for just.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Beantowne. Show Beantowne's posts

    Re: Martinez-Masterson Trade Revisted

    Then and now....

    If we look back at the state of the Roster when the deal was made. The Sox had a need for a middle of the order run producing bat to insert beteen Pedrioa and Youk. That Martinez also caught was a bonus but he was not aquired to bolster the catching position he was aquired to drive in runs and serve to lengthen our lineup sans Manny (after we lost out on Texiera)...Something he did quite well...The reason he was not re-signed was due to his not being a guy they could trust to be the everyday catcher in part due to his having a bum shoulder. Thus in the big picture given that Catcher was the only position in which his bat was among the elite but his defense and ability to handle a pitching staff were questionable at best. If you think about it the Tigers digned hm to a four year deal...knowing that they would deploy him in a "utility-dh role where the majority of his at bats would come as a DH...The Sox rightfully accessed his short and long term value as a DH and allowed him to walk. Because we already had Big Papi and Youk. Papi who has shown that all of the worries in 2008-2009 that he was in decline were premature and at the time of the deal Youk was a Gold Glove-900 OPS middle of the order run producer...

    End of the day if Martinez was indeed still an every day catcher. One who team could pencil into the lineup for 500 at bats and catch 130 games and conitnue to be a 300-25-100-hitter. How many teams do you think would have lined up to sign the guy?

    Inhindsight and foresight the Sox gave up 3 pitching prospects for 1 1/2 years of Martinez's bat and when they let him walk they recouped 2 prospects...one of which is today our top pitching prospect. I'd say both teams have benefitted from the deal...Masterson appears to be on his way to establishing himself as a solid middle of the rotation starter and Hagadone now appears to be healthy we'll see if the kid can realize the potentail he had coming out of college...

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from harv53. Show harv53's posts

    Re: Martinez-Masterson Trade Revisted

    And this is relevant how? Water under the bridge.....move on.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Martinez-Masterson Trade Revisted

    Had we won a ring with VMart, nobody would have cared about Masterson.

    Also, remember that the money paid to VMart longterm was used to extend AGon, and we also we gained 2 comp picks for losing VMart: Matt Barnes and Henry Owens.

    Let's "revisit" in 4 years.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from harv53. Show harv53's posts

    Re: Martinez-Masterson Trade Revisted

    In Response to Re: Martinez-Masterson Trade Revisted:
    In Response to Re: Martinez-Masterson Trade Revisted : What's even funnier is Prof. Softy didn't catch my other typo where I typed jsut for just.
    Posted by royf19


    You also said Jed when it's Justin.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from harv53. Show harv53's posts

    Re: Martinez-Masterson Trade Revisted

    Vmart was a much better catcher than Saltalamacchia could ever hope to be, so we didn't do anything to address that position.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: Martinez-Masterson Trade Revisted

    In Response to Re: Martinez-Masterson Trade Revisted:
    In Response to Re: Martinez-Masterson Trade Revisted : You also said Jed when it's Justin.
    Posted by harv53


    What's funny is that I kept calling him Jed in my head and kept correcting myself, sayingn, no, it's JED Lowrie and JUSTIN Masterson. Then I still go and type it the wrong way.

    That's what happens when you're talking to someone while making a post.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from maxbialystock. Show maxbialystock's posts

    Re: Martinez-Masterson Trade Revisted

    We needed Martinez at the time even though he certainly was not a good fix at catcher and we already had a pretty good DH (and still do).  I hated losing Masterson, but wished him well. 

    I am amazed at the OP's facts because I thought Masterson was a huge success in Cleveland.  He's a big, strong guy and has that natural sinker. 
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from hankwilliamsjr. Show hankwilliamsjr's posts

    Re: Martinez-Masterson Trade Revisted

    Too many posters are either not interested or get their ego wrapped up in their opinion. That's why I pick and choose who I respond to and what I respond to.

    Those who "pick and choose who to respond to" are the ultimate fragile self esteems. No one, Roy, has a more grandiose ego than you do. With low intelligence, that's a bad combination.

    As for the other "typos", I took one of them to lampoon your "opinion".
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from hankwilliamsjr. Show hankwilliamsjr's posts

    Re: Martinez-Masterson Trade Revisted

    So you mock the obvious typo of "he's pithed" and follow it up with "when you toasting".  Brilliant.

    I lampooned his opinion with one obvious typo.

    When you attempted to pass off "genocidal" as humor, your dimented mind is manifest for the rest of your natural life. The only reason you weren't subjected to the politically correct police is because you are an approved and endorsed NYT hack.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from beavis. Show beavis's posts

    Re: Martinez-Masterson Trade Revisted

    Masterson has taken a step back this year. Huge control issues, 6 walks last outing...what have you done for me lately...
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: Martinez-Masterson Trade Revisted

    Gee -- according to softy, I have a grandiose ego ... Cool


    ... but low intelligence. Cry


    I don't know how I can go on.Innocent
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share